On the 30th of September 2022, an article about Klim appeared in the Wochenblatt. Our Head of Agriculture, Lutz Wildermann, answered questions about the Klim concept. Here are a few selected excerpts from the article.
First, the Klim app and the system behind it are discussed:
Mr. Wildermann, the Klim benefit calculator comes up with a payment of 22 Euros for one hectare of undersown crops. How does this value come about?
Based on scientific studies, the planting of undersown crops can store an average of just under 700 kilograms of CO2 as permanent humus. The studies come from Germany from institutes such as the VDLUFA or the LfL. The storage capacity and the CO2 price are then used to calculate the payment for farmers.
So there are no soil tests and the CO2 storage capacity is determined solely on the basis of literature values?
Exactly. The big advantage of our system is that we don't need measurements. Because measurements are expensive and labor-intensive and often inaccurate. Oftentimes laboratories cannot determine any humus buildup even if the farmer had managed the field in a favorable way. The reason for this is that the measurement error is within the range of what is possible in terms of humus buildup with proper regenerative agriculture. With our system, the farmers know how much they can earn before even applying a regenerative method.
Did you develop your evaluation system internally, or did you also have scientific support?
During the development of the system, we sought advice from scientific institutions and received encouragement, for example from the Thünen Institute, for our method-based approach.
Lutz also faces popular criticism:
Your approach is based on fixed values that indicate how much carbon is stored by individual measures. Site influences such as climate and soil type are not taken into account. Isn't that critical?
We looked at storage performance based on different factors. For example, we differentiate between catch crops according to the sowing date. Otherwise, it should be noted that our approaches are estimated very conservatively in order to have to request as little data as possible from the farms. We do not yet take current climate data into account, but we have recently added a proven soil scientist to the team who is working on estimating precisely those influencing factors.
Another point of criticism is that carbon storage in the soil is easily reversible through incorrect management. Have you taken that into account?
To counter possible reversibility, we have introduced an incentive system: Farmers receive 80% of the maximum possible money from us in the year the measure is implemented. The farm receives the remaining 20% if it has maintained its level of measures on average over five years. If this is not successful, we can use the security amount to invest in climate protection projects.
Let's stay on the subject of credibility. It not only plays an important role in the long-term success of Klim - the reputation of agriculture is also at stake. Is your evaluation and remuneration system watertight against critics from the scientific community?
We want to operate in the market for the long term. This can only be achieved with credibility and trust. We therefore have our system validated and verified by external certifiers. But it is also clear that there is no such thing as the perfect approach. There are only approaches that are more or less suitable for practical use. We believe we are already well positioned in this respect. At the same time, we will continue to calibrate and improve our own system, for example in the area of satellite-supported information, in order to further reduce the documentation effort for the farms.
There's also a little insight into the future of Klim:
It sounds like you have a lot of things in store. Where do you see Klim in 10 years?
In 10 years, we will have managed to help a large percentage of farmers switch to regenerative farming practices. As a result, they will have improved their soil fertility and thus reduced the use of plant protection products and fertilizers while maintaining yields. In addition to compensating them for the resulting CO2 storage capacity, we are able to market the biodiversity benefits and food quality improvements associated with regenerative farming practices then. Thus, farmers will have more money in their pockets at the end of the day.