And

it's a competition takes place every year, and the task is make an amazing burgher, and 25 % of the meat has to be replaced by mushrooms. And so the idea is all actually, even if you make changes at the edges, it

can do amazing thing for what it tastes like. But the other thing is, they in

america, we ead about ten billion burghers each year. And so if every one of those burghers had 25 % of which mushrooms, that's like doing away with three million cars. Yoan look at small changes that have really a profound impact. And i think the

scope for these of adjustments is enor. I love this suggestion. I think it's so good. I mean, in part because f what you're saying, which is sometimes there's too much of an emphasis on illimination as opposed to reduction. And then the second is, i don't think people appreciate how much meat consumption drives environmental damage. Iits just, and then also, i like this idea, just of working on the edges, you don't have tgo for the full hundred % action.

I also ilove this idea that when you put a constraint on what al chef can do o, in many ways, it

spurs the most amount of creativity. This is a transition to your recommendation of choptavy show odo their work. Adoto,

but they can come up with really interesting

since there are also amazing efficiencies in production. Because you can grow mushrooms vertically, you can produce a million pounds per acre. W, that's fantastic.

Mushrooms continue

to be underrated. You

don't love mushrooms, you

don't. Ls ok, it's

a tes a lot of money. There's

a lot of different ones. You hav my understand exactly that a lot of the mushrooms with different ms are actually the same mushroom. There are no really significant differences, but they're all branded differently. Anyway, i'll look into thatwel,

i'll go next, cause mine has a kind of environmental angle as well. And it is the seemingly intractable problem of too much plastic in how we store, package and even consume food. So a couple of years ago, b b c's blue planet, they had this documentary which gave us a visual representation of how mch ats depended on the oceanr and you couldn't walk away from that without just being utterly horrified. And by the way, companies, in particular, the big multi national are really focused on their problem. And the problem is every solution creates new problems. It's a really, really hard problem to solve. The reason plastic is so ubiquitous is it's an amazing poter to yo. For one thing, it is really light and durable. So if you, for example, could snap your fingers and replace all the plastic used in packaging with either metal or glass, the environmental impact of that would be devastating, because everything we shipped would weigh so much more, and so the climate damage increase. Sace, i did that, it's an amazing product because it keeps food safe and fresh. So a cucumber, unpackaged, will spoil in three days. If it's wrapped in plastic, it lasts for two weeks. And the reason that's important is because a ton of food waste is three times as bad for the planet as a ton of packaging waste. Finally, plastic provides utility and so many multi purpose ways. So for example, there are so many towns and cities that have begun to band plastic bags at grocery chagaman, the first that happens when a city or a town bands plastic bags at check out lines is the sale of plastic garbage bags spikes. And the reason is people take those grocery bags and they use them multiple times, in particular to line the garbage and so once you take that away, they end at buying garbage bags, which are much worse for the planet, because they're much sturdier and they use a lot more bladi. The second thing that happens is that people start to use these canvas toats, which are, in many cases, ar made from cotton. So a danish study concluded that you have to use a cotton toat bag seven thousand times to break even on the environmental impact. And if it's organic cotton, those are the worst. You have to use those 20 thousand to but i think what you're also saying, young me, is a

simple rule of less plastic is actually a little naive, which is you always have to contrast it with an alternative. That's and interesting thing to me. Abou what you said, as there's the surprising second and third order of a yes. And so simple rules like less plaster are actually complicated. D notit, right? Least in my mind. The most promising rules just

require a lot more investment and a lot more commitment, and are going to take some time. So for every multinational go through and change the production processes to use less plastic, that's absolutely necessary, no, but it's not an indiscriminate thing. You have to be really selective about where you do that, and it takes some time. No, we have to rethink our products. So think about, like, a tub of laundry deturgent, or a bottle of champoo. Instead of buying a bottle of champoo, if you got a tiny little box of little capsules that were super, super concentrated, and that was your shampoo, and you just used a little after all. Iax, that kind of litle we would just in terms of the shipping and packaging and all the rest that like. So solutions come from rethinking things like that.

They come from rethinking holistically, right?