Future Farming and Feeding the Planet

Published on
January 17th, 2017
Duration
85 minutes

Future Farming and Feeding the Planet

The Interview ·
Featuring Alan Boyce

Published on: January 17th, 2017 • Duration: 85 minutes

Alan Boyce enthralled Real Vision viewers with his insider’s guide to agriculture investing and ultra modern farming methods. This time the former fed economist and partner in Tache Basin tackles the Federal Reserve’s credibility and their ability to control both inflation and the dollar amid Trump's isolationist policies. In a wide ranging discussion, Alan considers the unforeseen consequences of demographics, dollar strength and political missteps for the future of ag-tech and our ability to feed the planet.

Comments

  • RD
    Rui D.
    20 June 2019 @ 13:28
    Great! Would love to ear from Mr Boyce again.
  • pd
    preston d.
    3 June 2019 @ 20:22
    Is Alan on the radar for another visit?
  • JF
    Jennifer F.
    11 November 2018 @ 06:21
    ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT
  • JE
    James E.
    14 May 2018 @ 21:43
    Wow, Alan Boyce has a brilliant mind, I agree with just about all of this interview. Definitely a guy RV must have back. Thank you. J P Evans.
  • DK
    Darcy K.
    8 October 2017 @ 21:48
    As a agriculture producer in my thirties I could not agree more with his opinions. Alan nailed the demographics and the dollar denominated debt with younger producers. I'm looking forward to Alan's next interview.
  • MN
    Mark N.
    18 March 2017 @ 20:12
    Alan is my favorite RV guest. With regards to his views of a lack of farmable land, I would be curious to his opinion on greening the desert with permaculture.
  • RO
    Robert O.
    20 February 2017 @ 02:24
    California has been blessed with many natural resources but sometimes the cost of living in paradise is mistaking hubris for wisdom. I lived in CA for most of my life but moved away 20 years ago when it seems that things there were getting too crazy. Mr. Boyce describes this insanity all too well. I give him credit for tolerating this dysfunction with a smile. The Eagles came to CA from around the country and sang about what they saw. "Hell Freezes Over" showed that survival and hope are still possible.
  • SB
    Simon B.
    19 February 2017 @ 17:21
    9/10 Global Warming debate
  • SC
    Shane C.
    11 February 2017 @ 20:04
    see George Carlin on language and climate change
  • SC
    Shane C.
    11 February 2017 @ 19:09
    Alan, you are spot on my friend. SPOT ON I SUPPORT HIS ARGUMENT ENTIRELY.
  • WS
    Wouter S.
    10 February 2017 @ 04:14
    I just realized some quantification wouldn't hurt. Worldwide annual biodiesel consumption is somewhere between 23-27mil/mt. So we are burning about 25-30 billion liters of vegetable oils for transportation purposes.......thats quite some calories.
  • WS
    Wouter S.
    10 February 2017 @ 03:17
    Soft commodities stocks are not that low and can only be perceived as “low” in case of a unexpected supply disruption which would halt worldwide tradeflows. Not a scenario I would trade today. Even if that is a scenario which somebody would expect than one have to realize that the soft commodities supply is (massively) bigger than what the worldwide consumer can absorb at today's values. Over the past decade the worldwide mandated Ethanol and Biodiesel demand has “switched on” significant demand and thus acreage. Indeed food demand is a core demand which will always be there. This can create havoc if not served sufficiently HOWEVER the ethanol and biodiesel demand can be switched off with a stroke of a pen…so whenever push comes to shove Governments will let those grains and vegetable oils feed the people instead of usage for energy.
  • JL
    Jordan L.
    10 February 2017 @ 02:01
    Absolutely incredible. This has to be one of the smartest guys out there. Incredible insights on a broad range of topics. Do whatever you can to keep him coming back to Real Vision.
  • dm
    dan m.
    6 February 2017 @ 13:06
    Alan- have you read The Land was Everything by Victor Davis Hanson?
  • SH
    Steve H.
    3 February 2017 @ 22:18
    You would have to be an idiot to give this guy a thumbs down. Great broad knowledge base.
  • FB
    Frank B.
    31 January 2017 @ 04:40
    As a thermodynamics trained engineer I couldn't held myself but add my comment here. Mr. Alan Boyce states "I was trained in college to be allergic to those non-falsifiable hypothesis". Firstly, the global warming is not a hypothesis. It is an observational result, one that presently can be explained only by the greenhouse theory. Secondly, if he is allergic to falsifiability I assume he must be "allergic" to some of the best theories the science have come up with such as String Theory and Big Bang Theory, even to the complete study of anthropology.
  • ag
    anthony g.
    29 January 2017 @ 14:45
    bright guy - love to see him again.
  • VK
    Viresh K.
    26 January 2017 @ 17:58
    Just to add, as a 24 y/o, people like Alan genuinely show me how unintelligent I am in respect to these guys. A lot of work ahead to get even close.
  • VK
    Viresh K.
    26 January 2017 @ 17:56
    This guy is so good. So much knowledge was imparted in this interview.
  • DD
    Derek D.
    26 January 2017 @ 01:56
    It's the very nature of government employees to write laws distinctly against the interests of the people. There's no such thing as "good government". But people cling to it like a God.
  • DD
    Derek D.
    26 January 2017 @ 01:42
    Probably a good reason to get the government out of mortgages entirely. I know--blasphemy. It's only sensible and "reasonable" for govt to grow.
  • SA
    Scott A.
    24 January 2017 @ 23:50
    I'll go with hero. Great interview all around.
  • bp
    bart p.
    24 January 2017 @ 13:52
    Very good interview with somebody who obviously knows what he's talking about, would like to see more like this but he does come off as a bit arrogant imo.
  • CC
    Charles C.
    24 January 2017 @ 00:29
    Great, great interview all around. No "wacko" comments here. Just as in structuring a portfolio for more than one possible scenario, we should be trying to determine what possible scenarios could threaten existence and preparing intelligently for each according to some idea of the probability of its occurrence. That would then lead to a more appropriate analysis of steps that we can take. Because capital is always limited we would be forced to take a "Tim Farris" approach - where do we get the most output from the least input? Because it has been turned into a religion there is little sense of proportion - the rule seems to be where can we spend to get the most visible impact. Thanks to Alan for a measured view.
  • GM
    Greg M.
    23 January 2017 @ 16:27
    The best part of the interview was the last part on Agriculture. This interview could have easily been 2 or 3 hours. Overall, really enjoyed the interview and keep the good stuff coming.
  • MB
    Mike B.
    22 January 2017 @ 15:04
    Great interview RV. Tremendous insight. As for the Global warmimg, now called climate change, we all know the climate changes and has changed. The place i live today was covered in ice 10,000 years agoe, did man cause it to melt? Not likely. But man causes pollution which affects our land and water and may also contribute in some small way to climate change but politicians have used the topic to gain support and raise taxes because it is easier to raise taxes if it will result in saving the world from melting. People fall prey to their biases because they don’t want to put in the effort to overcome them. Not because they can’t.
  • AH
    Andreas H.
    22 January 2017 @ 12:16
    Like it very much, especially the farming and the "global warming" stuff, same opinion, if you got a thesis you can not prove, its is not science!
    • MT
      Mitchell T.
      9 May 2017 @ 18:41
      The basis of science is proving ideas wrong, not proving them right. In that way you iterate to the best solution. Einstein said ‘A thousand scientists can’t prove me right, but one can prove me wrong’. Anything in science could be proven wrong tomorrow but that is no argument for not treating as fact the theory that most data points to being correct. If there is another theory about the cause of global warming that makes more sense (by using verifiable data and reproducible experiments) then that new theory would be adopted by the scientific community.  
  • AM
    Alexander M.
    22 January 2017 @ 10:58
    Does anyone have any links to Alan's writing Grant was eluding to around the 10 ish minute mark?
  • JW
    J W.
    22 January 2017 @ 05:37
    I love the way he ends..."What if it's right?". A truly excellent risk management mindset. The question I usually ask true believers of anything, but especially global warming, is how many sigma (standard deviations) of certainty they have. In most cases, the responses from climate change believers are materially more certain than actual scientists (who are roughly 2-3 sigma, depending on how you count). His other discussion was also excellent--in some ways, this might have been better as a two-parter, so we wouldn't be so distracted at the end.
  • JC
    Justin C.
    22 January 2017 @ 00:27
    To Daniel W - the day RVTV starts superimposing their values on the interviewee is the day I drop my subscription. Grant is a truly excellent interviewer and the principal reason for RVTV's success. He has the skill, knowledge and persona required to draw out the extraordinary intellectual latitude which almost all of RVTVs subjects possess. (Alan Boyce is right up there in this respect.) This is exactly what I want and I reckon we arel all big enough to make up our own minds as to whether the opinions expressed make sense. Thanks Grant - keep it up please, you're doing a brilliant job.
  • EK
    Emil K.
    21 January 2017 @ 21:52
    Happy to see a low number of down votes despite the aggressive, bold ideas presented by Mr. Boyce.
  • RW
    Raymond W.
    21 January 2017 @ 20:24
    Sorry for the multiple comments. I am still limited in comment length when using the Real Vision app on my ipad.
  • RW
    Raymond W.
    21 January 2017 @ 20:22
    For those who want some exposure to the other side of the climate change issue they should watch the documentarty "The great global warming swindle."
  • RW
    Raymond W.
    21 January 2017 @ 20:20
    The science on man made global warming is not settled. You can tweek the dials on any complex multivariant model in order to get the desired results.
  • AH
    Andreas H.
    21 January 2017 @ 17:32
    Super, super, super!!! Hope we get a different deal now for the US!
  • CS
    Clive S.
    21 January 2017 @ 09:46
    For me, the best interview I've watched on Real Vision so far. Many thanks.
  • ET
    Eldon T.
    21 January 2017 @ 06:31
    Two thumbs up from a 70 year old stone fruit grower just outside of Visalia. Contrary to Alan's comments, we do exist. I enjoyed this conversation immensely since it pertains directly with my industry. Missing, however, was any consideration of robotics. Currently, there are tests being run in the state of Washington using robots to harvest apples. When technical difficulties are finally overcome, it will be a tremendous driver of industry profitability. Insane wage laws in California will only bring that date forward faster than any of us think.
  • wg
    william g.
    21 January 2017 @ 05:31
    Two thumbs up....applause, standing ovation. What an insightful interview!
  • KA
    Kevin A.
    21 January 2017 @ 02:04
    To Otto : One product that comes to mind is Almonds, but that is not exactly an annual turn over crop to swap around. Nearly all of U.S. production is in California. I don't remember in which zones Almonds grow best, or if they are good for NC and VA. Just an idea! Good Luck! (Disclaimer : not directly involved in Ag. Do your own research)
  • TR
    Thomas R.
    20 January 2017 @ 23:53
    I loved Jacob S's comment below - "Stop being afraid to let the videos go long. I could watch 4 hours of this." For myself I will watch this several times, map it against my investment thesis, and just sit and think. I'll also share it with my 19 year old son (as I have had him view a few other interviews and I'm proud to say his interest is rising. He won't get this type of thought provoking dialog in college) Thanks RV.
  • DC
    Dale C.
    20 January 2017 @ 14:53
    One of your top interviews. If people are worried about global warming they will really get worried when there is global cooling. Warm good, cold bad.
  • BM
    Bryan M.
    20 January 2017 @ 06:24
    Superior conversation. Superior topics. Will have to watch it again and again.
  • BM
    Bryan M.
    20 January 2017 @ 06:21
    M
  • OL
    Otto L.
    20 January 2017 @ 03:26
    Thanks to you both for another great interview. Question to Alan- As an owner of farmland in eastern NC and VA, what are the CA crops that you expect to become disadvantaged in CA due to labor, water, tax, environmental policy there? My goal is to repurpose some corn/soybean acreage in order to replace CA production that has become uneconomic in the CA regime. Any leads would be greatly appreciated! (FWIW, I was a geology major too converted to finance and have the same questions about climate change cycles/risks. "Unprecedented" is certainly abused by the MSM.)
  • GF
    Guillaume F.
    20 January 2017 @ 01:25
    I could not agree more on the global warming part! Thanks a lot Alan!
  • AM
    Alexander M.
    20 January 2017 @ 00:46
    Only 2mins into the video. Just wanted to say thank you very much for bringing Mr Boyce back onto RVTV.
  • JS
    Jerry S.
    20 January 2017 @ 00:35
    Really enjoy listening to both of these gentlemen. The global warming segment was very rational and therefore unique.
  • NG
    Nicolas G.
    19 January 2017 @ 20:56
    Oh, come on! @DW, They are developing a new business. They have to be nice to them. Once they achieve enough notoriety, they will be able to challenge them more. Grant is just making them feel comfortable so they talk the good stuff we are getting used to. Be patient.
  • DW
    Daniel W.
    19 January 2017 @ 19:58
    I find Grant's tendency to constantly agree and flatter the interviewee's quite annoying. His favorite words are "of course" because he has the same faults the financial industry suffers from- everything is obvious in hindsight. I would like to see another interviewer on RV.
  • SS
    Sam S.
    19 January 2017 @ 14:31
    Well done gentlemen. I heard the Obama Administration floated idea to make speaking out against Global Warming a crime/illegal. WTF. Global Warming, carbon credits and the like is nothing more than a "taxing mechanism" for which we know government will fight to keep and screw it up. Fighting real Pollution is hugely important. Man cannot stop nature, the solar system, the sun's activity and the earth's magnetic fields and how they act. Higher food price and a shortage of food. Politicians and policy makers need to accept and act on their mistakes which to will make them more popular than they can imagine. Being human is an imperfect existence.
  • JH
    Joe H.
    19 January 2017 @ 14:12
    This "crazy person" is brilliant. I'm jealous of Grant getting to talk to people like him.
  • NT
    Norman T.
    19 January 2017 @ 08:43
    This piece deseves a full transcript please!
  • JK
    Jeff K.
    19 January 2017 @ 04:30
    Does this brilliant guy publish any regular research?
  • JC
    Joe C.
    19 January 2017 @ 04:01
    Lifelong liberal / anthropogenic global warming believer here. I for one appreciate intelligent counterarguments like this one to challenge my worldview of 'settled' science. I know politics is a hot button issue in RV videos but I really enjoy every discussion in which it's brought up, even (and especially) the ones I don't initially agree with
  • WB
    William B.
    19 January 2017 @ 00:23
    Awesome interview.
  • HJ
    Harry J.
    18 January 2017 @ 20:17
    Great discussion.
  • HJ
    Harry J.
    18 January 2017 @ 20:16
    Let food stocks deplete, then count the number of people who believe in global warming. I doubt many people will argue with the concept.
  • MS
    Mark S.
    18 January 2017 @ 17:35
    Virtually all other changes in global climate happened over long spans of geologic time, not over the span of a few human generations. Species did adapt to those changes, and will adapt to ongoing change, but the planet is under extreme stress due to the very rapid pace of change in global climate. Humans can and will adapt to any change, but we are playing a very dangerous game of chance if we think there will be few negative consequences. There is no single "correct" climate for the Earth, but we should all understand the destabilizing effects of rapid change. Climate change deniers have done a great disservice to us all by claiming it is a hoax. This has created an environment where anyone who doesn't agree 100% with the narrative is painted as a nut job. The discussion we should be having is about what the economic and societal consequences of climate change are, relative to those mitigating steps we can take. We can then attempt to lower the risk of destabilization by making informed choices. Investment in renewable energy sources has been one massively positive result, with little downside to the global economy. As mentioned, water storage is another area we should be investing in. The downside if we take action may be a reduction in global economic growth rates - not ideal. But the downside of taking no action has the potential to be devastating to human civilizations across the globe - a much more negative outcome than a few tenths off of global GDP. Global catastrophe is not a guaranteed result of unmitigated climate change, but there is certainly a greater than zero percent chance.
  • JM
    James M.
    18 January 2017 @ 16:46
    Broad and epic watch!
  • AG
    Alexander G.
    18 January 2017 @ 14:52
    Wow, that was excellent
  • AH
    Aaron H.
    18 January 2017 @ 14:06
    Appreciate Boyce's candor and insights.
  • JV
    JP V.
    18 January 2017 @ 13:24
    Finally someone who dares to challenge the 'almighty climate preachers". All this climate discussion is simply a bonanza for those who can claim emission rights. It's, as usual, all about money.
  • PM
    Philip M.
    18 January 2017 @ 11:16
    Awesome.....
  • RM
    Russell M.
    18 January 2017 @ 06:50
    Terrific breath and depth of knowledge and thinking perspective.
  • ML
    Michael L.
    18 January 2017 @ 05:53
    a true philosopher king
  • js
    jacob s.
    18 January 2017 @ 04:23
    Stop being afraid to let the videos go long. I could watch 4 hours of this.
  • dJ
    d J.
    18 January 2017 @ 03:40
    Thanks for giving such great minds the time it takes to articulate their ideas. This interview was not long enough!
  • ZA
    Zach A.
    18 January 2017 @ 02:46
    What if its not right? What if we are at a peak in temps that just happens to coincide with peak global population? Colder and less CO2 is NOT a good recipe for crop yields. Colder is just as deadly and problematic as hotter. Beware the common knowledge.
  • T~
    Tshort63 ~.
    18 January 2017 @ 01:52
    Awesome interview, loved the discussion and give and take. I think the discussion about causation and correlation with some form of inherent bias is spot on for many of our issues. Open to all his theories. Key takeaway for me is to stay mentally malleable even the best are wrong in a complex world.
  • LR
    Luigi R.
    18 January 2017 @ 01:42
    Brilliant...fascinating...well done. What if, indeed...
  • FR
    Frank R.
    18 January 2017 @ 01:21
    Finally, someone who understands and can articulate long cycles. Most people have a worms' eye view of the earth through time and conditions in the geologic past.
  • RP
    Ron P.
    18 January 2017 @ 00:14
    Enjoyed the talk Agree on everything except this Keep the genes from insects out of my food...thank you
  • EL
    Elizabeth L.
    17 January 2017 @ 23:24
    I am sorry to add this comment but I think likening those of us who are retired to "dogs" who just consume is an unthinkable idea to hold and express in a Real Vision Interview. I am 75 years old. I worked all my life starting with farming chores at a young age. Worked full time putting myself through 4 advanced educational degrees. Additionally worked 60 plus hour weeks with constant travel for two decades. Saved and built a good retirement only to have a trusted financial advisor put most of it with Madoff. Have received zero by way of recovery. Today, I spend 6 plus hours a day managing what is left of my portfolio. All my age friends are either still working for pay or volunteering. In other words all still producing. I give a brief description of my life because it is the life most of my generation lived. I was one who had asked for Allen Boyce to return because of the value he added in his first interview. I am sorry to hear that he thinks so poorly of the generation upon whose shoulders he stood to build his career and make his contributions. I can only hope that the generation upon whom he will rely in his retirement will be more compassionate.
  • FB
    Fernando B.
    17 January 2017 @ 22:43
    Tycho Brahe lost his nose in a dual. Not for the beleive in the heliocentric idea. Tycho Brahe's nose got lost, quite early, in a student fight. On December 10, 1566, Tycho and the Danish blue blood Manderup Parsbjerg were guests at an engagement party at Prof. Bachmeister in Rostock. The party included a ball, but the festive environment did not keep the two men from starting an argument that went on even over the Christmas period. On December 29, they finished the matter with a rapier duel. During the duel, which started at 7 p.m. in total darkness, a large portion of the nose of Brahe was cut off by his Opponent. It was the most famous cut in science, if not the unkindest.
  • AG
    Alex G.
    17 January 2017 @ 22:41
    Plenty of smart Agriculture kids at cal state bakersfield although I am biased :)
  • DG
    Daniel G.
    17 January 2017 @ 22:12
    I'd love to see Alan's views on Aquaponics (using fish waste water to grow fruits and veg) in greenhouses. A federal program that incentivises a revolutionary technology like that would be world changing.
  • GS
    Gunnar S.
    17 January 2017 @ 21:43
    I was actually tying to write Hydroponic greenhouse stocks...hehe but it came out pretty mind bending :)
  • BF
    Bruce F.
    17 January 2017 @ 21:36
    virtually all interviews are excellent, this one is beyond. he makes so much sense.
  • GS
    Gunnar S.
    17 January 2017 @ 21:34
    What if its wrong? Buy hydrophobic greenhouse stocks?
  • TS
    Tyler S.
    17 January 2017 @ 20:46
    That was a great interview! I agree, what if it is right, I believe it is and like 08 the world is looking the other way and is to busy with day time dramas and social media distractions.
  • SS
    Stephen S.
    17 January 2017 @ 20:39
    Loved it! High bar set for the beginning of the year. Keep it up guys.
  • db
    don b.
    17 January 2017 @ 19:53
    The other dark secret of the Fed to keep inflation down is to collapse money velocity. So they can keep oil prices low suppress gold and then print money to enrich the 1% while the real economy struggles.
  • PB
    Pieter B.
    17 January 2017 @ 16:29
    Great interview again! Thanks a lot!