The delay in adopting biosolutions is not just a business problem; it's a massive missed opportunity for the planet. The CEO quantifies the cost of regulatory inaction, stating that deploying only existing technologies—without any new innovation—could cut global CO2 emissions by 8%.

Related Insights

To counter political backlash against ESG, Mars' CEO reframes sustainability as a fundamental business imperative. For a food company reliant on agriculture, climate change directly threatens crop viability and affordability. This makes environmental action a matter of operational resilience and risk management, completely separate from political debate.

Large enterprises navigate a critical paradox with new technology like AI. Moving too slowly cedes the market and leads to irrelevance. However, moving too quickly without clear direction or a focus on feasibility results in wasting millions of dollars on failed initiatives.

While a major contributor to emissions, the agricultural industry is also more vulnerable to climate change impacts than almost any other sector. This dual role as both primary cause and primary victim creates a powerful, intrinsic motivation to innovate and transition from a "climate sinner to saint," a dynamic not present in all industries.

Citing a Harvard Business School study of 1,800 companies, Sir Ronald Cohen reveals the staggering scale of negative externalities. A third of these firms (600) cause environmental damage equivalent to a quarter or more of their profits, while 250 create more damage than they make in profit, highlighting the financial materiality of impact.

Instead of tackling multiple downstream symptoms, identify and solve the single upstream "lead domino" problem. For example, making energy abundant and cheap through nuclear power makes complex challenges like recycling and carbon capture economically and technically feasible, rather than performative, inefficient gestures.

While the FDA is often blamed for high trial costs, a major culprit is the consolidated Clinical Research Organization (CRO) market. These entrenched players lack incentives to adopt modern, cost-saving technologies, creating a structural bottleneck that prevents regulatory modernization from translating into cheaper and faster trials.

The tech world is fixated on trivial AI uses while monumental breakthroughs in healthcare go underappreciated. Innovations like CRISPR and GLP-1s can solve systemic problems like chronic disease and rising healthcare costs, offering far greater societal ROI and impact on longevity than current AI chatbots.

The way we grow food is a primary driver of climate change, independent of the energy sector. Even if we completely decarbonize energy, our agricultural practices, particularly land use and deforestation, are sufficient to push the planet past critical warming thresholds. This makes fixing the food system an urgent, non-negotiable climate priority.

Regulating technology based on anticipating *potential* future harms, rather than known ones, is a dangerous path. This 'precautionary principle,' common in Europe, stifles breakthrough innovation. If applied historically, it would have blocked transformative technologies like the automobile or even nuclear power, which has a better safety record than oil.

Beyond environmental benefits, climate tech is crucial for national economic survival. Failing to innovate in green energy cedes economic dominance to countries like China. This positions climate investment as a matter of long-term financial and geopolitical future-proofing for the U.S. and Europe.