Gillian Christie

Why California's SB 54 Creates a Historic Opportunity for Corn Next California's SB 54 is reshaping the future of packaging. Many companies see it as a regulatory challenge, but for Corn Next, it represents one of the biggest market opportunities in decades. SB 54 doesn't just restrict the use of plastic; it accelerates the transition to truly natural materials. And that's exactly what Corn Next was designed for. 1. SB 54 targets plastics, not natural materials The bill requires all single-use packaging to be recyclable or compostable by 2032, putting pressure on the following materials: Non-recyclable plastics Non-compostable plastics “Bioplastics” that release microplastics Multi-layer/hybrid plastic films Plastic-coated paper Corn Next doesn't fall into any of these categories. Corn Next is a natural material; it's neither plastic nor chemically modified bioplastics. It returns to the soil in about 390 days, producing no microplastics and leaving no chemical residues. 2. Corn Next has met the requirements of SB 54. SB 54 accelerated four key transformations: Eliminating microplastics Reducing plastic usage by 25% Lowering Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) fees through safer materials Using non-toxic, low-energy raw materials Corn Next naturally meets all of these requirements: 98% corn-based PLA/PHA-free Unmodified by chemicals No fossil carbon footprint Low-temperature processing We don't need to redesign our materials to meet the requirements—our products meet them from the start. 3. Major brands are actively seeking natural alternatives. Companies across industries, from food and beverage, retail, e-commerce, healthcare to consumer goods, must wean themselves off plastics by 2032. They urgently need: Natural straws Natural spoons Natural staple fibers Natural cutlery Natural packaging materials Corn Next provides these products—and globally. 4. A New Category Emerging in the US SB 54 creates a new regulatory gap between two product categories: ❌ Plastics ❌ Bioplastics ❌ Coated Paper and ✅ Truly Natural, Non-Synthetic Materials Corn Next defines this category. Through enzymatic recombination of corn starch, we produce a material that performs identically to the product but ultimately degrades like food. 5. A Once-in-a-Lifetime Market Opportunity SB 54 is more than just a California law. It's a blueprint that other states are following. For Corn Next, this means: Policy empowering us to build a natural materials ecosystem Growth in global brand demand A clear compliance path to zero microplastic emissions A multi-billion dollar alternative market by 2032 Corn Next isn't passively responding to SB 54—we're fully prepared. California is reshaping packaging rules, and natural materials will lead the next decade. This is our time. Corn Next is committed to leading change.

28

1 Comment

In uncertain times, Win-Win-Win opportunities are hard to find, but CarbonPilot has done it. Read Tristan Springer's post to find out more. #climate #commodities #resiliency #cocoa #traders #brands #farmers

14

1 Comment

Agriculture innovations are making farming more productive and resilient to climate change. But we need smart policies to scale these solutions. Excited to share a valuable report from EDF's Andrew Hutson and Erin Leonard. Appreciate the opportunity to contribute to this!

7

3 Comments

For years, sustainability in food and agriculture came with an assumption that impact would cost more. That assumption is breaking down. I wrote this piece after a conversation with David I. Bassani at Maia Ventures, reflecting on how agrifood innovation is maturing toward discipline, resilience, and real-world economics. It’s not about trends or deal flow. It’s about what actually works when impact has to stand on its own. Beyond the Green Premium 👉 https://lnkd.in/g6-d42uz

9

The Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) is a $125 bn facility launched this week to protect forests in tropical countries. I like Renat Heuberger's article below where he dissects this facility's ability to address (or not) the paradoxes that have burdened carbon markets (particularly forest-carbon / REDD). This facility could be a great compliment to REDD, and we need all the money we can get for forests. However, as the article shows, it is also subject to the 'IFs' of performance-based payments for public externalities, there are two additional issues I find: ☢️ Conflict of interest>>> The main champion of this facility is Norway, an oil state. They have a conflict of interest with Carbon markets, as each $1 paid by fossil fuel towards carbon credits is $1 less of revenue for the Norwegian sovereign fund. The same country behind part-ownership of TheGuardian (via a Norwegian foundation, and the media outlet's chairman is also Norwegian), and the funding of several academic bodies whose papers were most critical of carbon markets. Norway should ALSO embrace carbon markets - or this initiative will look like greenwashing. 💰 Real money or smoke and mirrors?>>> The facility is touted as $125bn but if you read carefully, it is a $25bn facility hoping to unlock $100bn of private financing. I hope it succeeds. https://lnkd.in/eXEyh-9K

11

1 Comment

Rethinking our systems as Lauren Manning describes is really important. Two systems, financial and agricultural are intertwined in ways that exacerbate issues instead of structuring in a way that can make both these systems more resilient.

8