It is my style to attempt to personalize my writings by adding historic anecdotes from my past resources or finding more topical news to add spice to the theme of the day. So last week my mind was searching for the right “insert” to the Environment, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) theme. To my absolute amazement, last week became a very special, somewhat magical week. I was introduced to Watson!

Now by introduced I don’t mean up-front and personal, shaking hands type of first meeting. That would be difficult because a) Watson has paws, and b) Watson lives in Toronto (more than 10,000 miles / 16,000 km away). No, it was an across-the-airwaves type of introduction. Now, I have needed to reference the Canadian Privacy Laws to ascertain what I can and cannot say about Watson and I think what I am about to say is OK. Watson is a dog, owned by a professional colleague of mine. I do not know Watson’s breed, his colouring, or anything really, but I do know he is definitely male. A couple of reasons will soon be revealed.

Watson was taking his owner for a walk through the Toronto snow when he discovered something interesting in a three-foot snow drift. In he went! My recollection of the phone conversation at this point is: “Watson has just dived into a three-foot snow drift and all I can see are his ‘nads!” So, with those two attributes taken as a given, Watson is male! What that has to do with ESG and Critical Minerals is coming up.

The silence of ASX-listed critical minerals companies on ESG

Now, for those of you who frequently scan my writings to review the updates of the ASX-listed Critical Minerals companies you will have noticed that there are no tables. This is simply because there are no updates!

To date, I have contacted 16 of the 36 Rare Earth related companies for nada response. I have contacted 13 of the 60 Lithium companies. And again, thanks Ian Bucknell of Ioneer Ltd. for your reply. And again it is well worth taking the time to review their “Towards Sustainable Mining” work. That’s 1. Plus 14 of the 19 Vanadium companies and 13 of the 28 Cobalt companies. So, I am 56 reach outs and only 1 reply. What does this have to do with Watson?

Well, I am hoping that the ASX-listed Critical Minerals companies would respond to general queries on their ESG programs and progress. Guess not yet! And be careful of our North American friends who may be thinking things about Aussies. I have yet to receive a proactive North American Critical Minerals company pounding at my door to tell the story of their ESG prowess! Back to Watson. So instead of writing about the ESG performances, I guess I’ll have to talk about why I have no responses. This is where Watson fits in. Watson realized there was something valuable in that snow drift and in chasing it he went. He was prepared to leave his ‘nads exposed. That’s how I am feeling now. Not that exposed, but in looking at why people haven’t responded, I may upset someone. Is it worth postulating? Here goes!

It was suggested that all of my queries have been captured by Spam-ware and have disappeared before being given any serious consideration. But you would have thought that references to the Critical Minerals Institute and InvestorIntel would have piqued some interest?

Is it me or you?

Then I thought that maybe it was me! However, I don’t think I know enough people in the space for that possibility to be real. Although, I have presented at many conferences, seminars, and the like, and my presentation style can sometimes be seen as a little non-conventional, but I don’t think that was the reason.

No. I am sure it is the company’s approach to ESG that is preventing public disclosure other than what is necessary in ASX rules and then only available on websites. Why? Can it be our (Aussie) tall poppy syndrome, where if you raise your head someone will shoot it off? Makes some sense not to be seen as an early target for the woke ESG warriors. However, as I raised in the last article, by not being proactive, you run the risk, no, you have already lost control of the agenda. Remember the superannuation funds asking for “disclosure of time-bound climate transition plans”. Still makes me cringe! As I clarified:

1. You have to have a climate transition plan,
2. That plan is time-bound, and
3. The plan has to be disclosed.

And heaven forbid if this Investor Group (and its lobby groups) isn’t satisfied with the details in the plan. It gets worse.

Now for my ultimate Watson. I am going to put myself into the position of a CEO of a Critical Minerals company looking to raise funds but having to face the woke ESG brigade. How do you relate to the audience that the technology you are using is state of the art, best in class, minimizes power usage, presents products into the world of renewables, BUT, does not achieve anywhere near net zero carbon? I’ll leave you with that question and trust when it is your turn to present, your audience appreciates your Watson moment!

The article below provides some insight into the questions raised in the Sustainability Program at PDAC 2023 and the price of “losing control” of a company’s Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) agenda as well as continues my series (now on part 4) on contacting Australian Stock Exchange-listed Critical Minerals companies to get their views on ESG.

ESG and Critical Minerals Development – The Price of Lost Control

I was wondering how to answer a key question proffered in the Sustainability Program from PDAC 2023:

• How do you “Differentiate your company and attract investment through ESG performance and reporting?”

This is all around my previous concerns about losing control of the agenda by not being proactive with ESG; not being bold with ESG; others have taken control. This is pointedly identified in an article by Geoff Chambers, Chief Political Correspondent and Simon Benson, Political Editor in The Australian newspaper, Tuesday, March 7th, 2023. “Investor Groups seek certainty on Labor safeguard mechanism”. This is about an aggregation of some of the largest superannuation funds in Australia banding together to dictate woke ESG policy direction. Talk about lost control. This is the price of lost control. What that will eventually cost, I’ll try to discuss later, but to the point.

“Australian investor groups representing members with $US43 trillion in assets under management want the government to bolster the safeguard mechanism and avoid “greenwashing” by forcing heavy emitters to disclose time-bound climate transition plans.”

I want you to think about “disclosure of time-bound climate transition plans”. Made me cringe!

1. You have to have a climate transition plan,
2. That plan is time-bound, and
3. The plan has to be disclosed.

And heaven forbid if this Investor Group (and its lobby groups) isn’t satisfied with the details in the plan. It gets worse.

“Where technology is not yet available, carbon credits will play a vital role in helping facilities meet their obligations and remain competitive,…”

The cost of this lost control of the ESG agenda? I find it impossible to predict the timing of when the whole Net Zero process falls apart and we wake up to some sort of new, post-climate apocalypse awakening, new-normal. But it will. But in the meantime, you have to be ready to “disclose time-bound climate transition plans” that are acceptable to the Investor Group. Sounds impossible? Does to me. That means your finance has dried up. That’s the cost of losing control. How long? Well, that depends.

Achieving Operational Net Zero

So, you and I know that you cannot achieve net zero in your operations. You and I also know that you thought you only have two options going forward. One is to plug the gap by buying carbon credits. The other is to hope this whole movement will come to a true sense of realization and fall apart. Any thoughts on how you are going to include “not yet available technology” in your plan? There are also politicians who don’t want carbon credits allowed since “real” emissions reduction isn’t occurring.

You have to ask yourselves the question: “Am I prepared to regain control of the agenda?” If your answer is yes, then go back through my articles where I have told you what to do to demonstrate your ESG credentials. And if you need a good operating example, look at Ioneer Ltd posted in Article 3 of this series. You need to get going. How much time (and hence money) do you have? Well, until the key part of the Net Zero program fails and its failure is seen as a death knell to the 2050 target. What is the key part?

The HR Dilemma

Human Resources. The western world will come to a point where it will realize that it has taken 2 generations to completely overwhelm our education system with anti-STEM, pro-end of the world cataclysmic theories where fossil fuels are bad, development is bad, the future of the planet is at risk. OK, we have a self-induced climate change awareness revolution. But see the irony here? Who is going to fix it? Where is STEM? By creating the environment for the outrage around climate change we have decimated the education system that is needed to provide the resources required to fix it.

The following article by Simon Packham, Foreign Affairs and Defence Correspondent, again from The Australian newspaper, Tuesday, March 6th, 2023. “Submarines ‘need 108 Ph.D. level nuclear scientists per year’”. Not sure if this situation rings true in the US, but it should certainly be ringing alarm bells for those people who think that developing approximately 10 times our current world outputs for rare earths, lithium, vanadium, cobalt, copper, etc is a simple walk in the park. Where are the Human Resources coming from? So, the answer to when is the announcement that the Net Zero program failed is the timeline of acceptance of the Human Resources issue.

Oh, the Price of the Lost Control? Your unrealized profits during this period. And more, much more.

ESG and ASX-listed Cobalt Companies

The process of contacting key Australian Stock Exchange-listed Critical Minerals companies to get their views on ESG has continued this week. The table below for Cobalt will complete the first round of contacting key players. Future articles will hopefully cover the responses coming in, and possibly then contacting some of the lesser players. We will see how that goes. Previous articles 1-3 provide context for anyone who has missed that.

I have updated the Rare Earths reference table and am still to receive any responses. (See Appendix A: ESG in Rare Earths development)

I have updated the Lithium reference table to include the response of Ian Bucknell of Ioneer Ltd. (Thanks Ian.) (See Appendix B: ESG in Lithium development.)

I totally recommend people interested in ESG to read the Ioneer 2022 Sustainability and ESG Report. Their approach using the Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) framework is first class and looks to have today’s ESG needs well covered.

I have updated the Vanadium reference table and have received no responses to date. See Appendix C: ESG in Vanadium development)

Below is the Cobalt reference table. In the next issue, we will allow access to the tables via links and similarly with the ESG responses from the queried companies.

Cobalt Companies

Appendix A: ESG in Rare Earths Development

Appendix B: ESG in Lithium Development

Appendix C: ESG in Vanadium Development

The process of contacting key Australian Stock Exchange-listed Critical Minerals companies to get their views on ESG continued this week. I am looking to assuage the concerns of some of our stakeholders as to the ESG credentials of those Australia-based organizations that are in a position to supply and value add to the Critical Minerals shortage the world is now facing.

The questions are not designed as a platform for investment decisions, but as an important step towards letting you know what their values are, what their achievements have been, and where they see our industry heading. The reference table will include the company name, the ASX Ticker code, their website reference, their current Market Capitalisation, and their response to the ESG questionnaire.

The reference table will include all of the Australia-based companies that qualify for the Australian Critical Minerals Strategy referenced below.

2022 Critical Minerals Strategy

The survey questions were:

1. A brief description of your activities
2. How do you define ESG?
3. What should stakeholders be aware of in your approach to ESG?
4. How do you see ESG becoming an important function in the future?
5. Do you have any ESG lessons learned that you may wish to share?

I have updated the Rare Earths reference table but have received no responses as yet. (See Appendix A: Rare Earths Table.)

Below is the Lithium reference table. In the next issue, we will add the Vanadium table, followed by the Cobalt table. Each issue will allow access to the tables via links and similarly with the ESG responses from the queried companies.

Lithium Company Table

As an aside, if I was responsible for responding to the above query, I would also publish that response to the ASX and include it on the website for an ongoing reference.

Appendix A: Rare Earths Table

As I mentioned in a previous article, I am contacting key Australian Stock Exchange-listed Critical Minerals companies to get their views on Environmental, Social, and (corporate) Governance (“ESG”). I am looking to assuage the concerns of some of our stakeholders as to the ESG credentials of those Australia-based organizations that are in a position to supply and value add to the Critical Minerals shortage the world is now facing.

The questions are not designed as a platform for investment decisions, but as an important step toward letting investors know what their values are, what their achievements have been, and where do they see our industry heading.

The reference table will include the company name, the ASX Ticker code, their website reference, their current Market Capitalization, and their response to the ESG questionnaire.

The reference table will include all of the Australia-based companies that qualify as part of the Australian Critical Minerals Strategy referenced below.

2022 Critical Minerals Strategy

The survey questions were:

1. A brief description of your activities
2. How do you define ESG?
3. What should stakeholders be aware of in your approach to ESG?
4. How do you see ESG becoming an important function in the future?
5. Do you have any ESG lessons learned that you may wish to share?

I will update the reference tables regularly and highlight any new responses received. As this is the first time, here is the Rare Earths table. The next issue will be the Lithium table, followed by the Vanadium and Cobalt tables. Each issue will allow access to the tables via links and similarly with the ESG responses from the queried companies.

Note: At the time of publication, there have been no ESG responses to those Rare Earth companies queried.

As an aside, if I was responsible for responding to the above query, I would also publish that response to the ASX and include it on the company’s website for ongoing reference.

Have you noticed that there are a couple of weird things about the spate of recent public temper tantrums by elected officials about ESG matters, especially in the US? Weird thing number one: the gripers all are politicians, so far universally from the Republican Party, which USED to be the pro-business party. Second weird thing: most businesses aren’t wasting time griping, they are adapting – and finding that doing so makes money.

Yes, you read that right – done properly, embracing ESG metrics can make money – for companies and investors – while improving livelihoods and helping to slow the impacts of climate change.

An article in the Toronto Star this month entitled World’s Biggest Carbon-emissions cutters – including TransAlta and CP Rail – also make money, new report finds is a clear example that across industries, companies willing to invest in changing their behavior and reducing their environmental impact, especially in the key area of carbon reduction, can and do maintain their bottom lines and in some cases have increased their profitability due to cost reductions inherent in new technologies. This in turn, of course, leads to increased benefits to shareholders and other stakeholders. This is substantiated by a Morningstar study in which the group concluded that investors can build a global portfolio of companies with positive ESG attributes without compromising returns.

Likewise, research by MSCI classifying funds by their ESG exposure shows a clear and growing investor preference for funds and companies with strong ESG compliance. The MSCI study grouped funds into buckets ranging from AAA (fund is exposed to companies tending to show strong or improving management of financially relevant ESG issues and which may be more resilient to disruptions arising from ESG events) to CCC (fund is exposed to companies not demonstrating adequate management of ESG risks and which may be more vulnerable to disruptions arising from ESG events). MSCI concluded that over $1 trillion has moved from funds on the lower end of the scale to the higher end over the last decade – a movement which appears to be accelerating. In studying the profile of investors, the MSCI analysis found that 88% of high-net worth millennials are actively reviewing the ESG impact of their investment holdings, while 89% of the same group expect their financial professional to do a deep dive into a company’s ESG factors and history with ESG issues before recommending an investment opportunity.

Conversely, not taking action to do more on ESG issues leads to substantial negative consequences for companies, investors and stakeholders.

A recent study by the Harvard Business Journal cited insurance giant Swiss Re saying that not acting on climate will destroy around 18% of global GDP by 2050. If you stop and think about that for a moment, it’s a staggering statement of risk. But the Harvard wonks took that a step further, examining the diverse consequences of climate change in which some areas, such as Siberia, might find growing seasons extended, but in other places (such as Phoenix, my home) cities could become too hot to be livable while some island nations will be swallowed by rising seas. This means, they concluded, that the downside risk for certain regional and (in the case of islands) national economies could be 100%, not 18%.

There’s a third weird thing about the political opposition to ESG. If investors want to put their money into companies engaging in climate-positive actions, and if companies are actively revising their business models to be more climate friendly – what exactly is the problem that these politicians supposedly are concerned with?

When you break down the principles of ESG into their most basic components, it simply amounts to doing the right things for people and the planet.

What’s wrong with that?

Disclaimer: The editor of this post may or may not be a securities holder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. None of the companies discussed in the above feature have paid for this content. The writer of this article/post/column/opinion is not an investment advisor, and is neither licensed to nor is making any buy or sell recommendations. For more information about this or any other company, please review all public documents to conduct your own due diligence. To access the InvestorIntel.com Disclaimer, click here

The Governor of the State of Louisiana has joined political colleagues in Texas and Florida in ordering that State funds should be withdrawn from financial institutions choosing to realign their investment portfolios to include more alternative energy producers and fewer carbon intensive sources. State Treasurer John Schroder effectively denounced this forward-looking investment strategy – and indeed, by implication, the right of banks to re-balance in light of changing economic circumstances – when he said: “This divestment is necessary to protect Louisiana from mandates BlackRock has called for that would cripple our critical energy sector.”

Now, let’s be clear about a couple of things. The real reference here is to the oil and coal industries, which are the largest contributors to the State’s tax base and generate approximately 8% of its GDP. Louisiana is the third largest petroleum producer in the US and the fifth largest refiner. In addition, the Louisiana Oil Port, the only one of its kind in the US, is the entry point for the majority of foreign oil entering the US. This is a valuable asset worth protecting, and as current economic developments underscore, one worth defending for a variety of reasons.

However – and this is a significant “but” – there are better and more worthwhile ways to protect oil’s position as an element of the national energy composition than trying to punish financial institutions for rational investment decisions.

For instance: the State could consider using all or a portion of the returns on its BlackRock portfolio to further incentivize oil companies to accelerate deployment of cleaner technologies in both extraction and production. Or for instance, it could use those same returns to bolster employment and economic development in neighbors near refineries considered “disadvantaged.” Another option would be using those returns to reinforce shore defenses against rising sea levels – which also will begin affecting the oil industry in the not-so-distant future.

Any of these – or even better ideas – would have allowed the State to continue a financially beneficial relationship with BlackRock, and contribute to the well-being of the State employees part of whose retirement fund no doubt is affected by this decision while allowing the State to claim credit for behaving in a responsible “greener” fashion.

Let’s not forget that as well as the direct blast at BlackRock, at least 7 foreign banks were caught in the riptide of this decision. In response to a question during their panel at the FT-Nikkei “Investing in America” conference in New York October 6, Gerald Walker, ING Americas CEO, and Timothy Wennes, CEO of Santander Bank US, both dismissed the financial significance of decisions by Louisiana and other States as relatively insignificant in the scale of the trillions of assets they have under management. Walker also pointed out that investment decisions reflect market factors including elements such as the growing share of alternatives in the US energy mix. Both men agreed that social pressures driving impact investment, in which consumers and institutional investors alike are increasingly using ESG factors in determining resource allocations are having a noticeable effect but are not solely determinative for portfolio decisions.

A word of advice to State governments thinking they can scare banks into maintaining the investment status quo: you are doing more harm to your State than to the Bank, and trying to use political levers to alter the course of investment decisions has not and will not work.

Disclaimer: The editor of this post may or may not be a securities holder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. None of the companies discussed in the above feature have paid for this content. The writer of this article/post/column/opinion is not an investment advisor, and is neither licensed to nor is making any buy or sell recommendations. For more information about this or any other company, please review all public documents to conduct your own due diligence. To access the InvestorIntel.com Disclaimer, click here

So, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced last week that he was, via executive fiat through the State Board of Administration, ordering that “social, political or ideological interests” be banned from consideration when making decisions for the State’s pension fund. Now, this is noteworthy for several reasons, but before I get to those, let me just quote the astonishing insight behind this decision. Here it is:

“Corporate power has increasingly been utilized to impose an ideological agenda on the American people through the perversion of financial investment priorities under the euphemistic banners of environmental, social and corporate governance and diversity, inclusion and equity.” 

Some might say that other institutions, such as the Supreme Court, are doing a much more direct and vigorous job of imposing an ideological agenda on the American people than corporations – but, laying that aside, let’s take a look into a couple of aspects here.

At least the Governor knows his enemy, correctly spelling out what ESG and DEI stand for. But does he know what they represent?

E is for Environment. Increasingly fragile in the Southern Coastal States, where rising oceans, more deadly hurricanes and more prolonged and destructive rainfall are imposing billions of dollars in actual costs and threatening to create a tide of “climate refugees” forced to relocate from formerly prime real estate. Seems like a responsible political leader would laud corporate efforts to reduce the climate impact of operations, especially if your state has 1,350 miles of coastline.

S is for Social, i.e., people (otherwise known as voters or constituents, in this context). To save time, and because they flow together, let’s also discuss diversity, inclusivity and equity (DEI) in this space. Aside from the human impacts mentioned above under environment, all these elements taken together represent important decisions by businesses to try, within reasonable constraints, to ensure that their workforces more closely resemble the faces seen in America – and other countries – in all their varied skin hues, genders and philosophies. In other words, to value and respect each human individual for what they contribute to advancing the business. Funny – seems like a politician or a political leader should be very interested in a bigger tent filled with more – and more diverse – supporters.

G is for governance. Following laws, doing the right thing, having clear procedures, and being bound by ethics and morality… seems like those all are good things. Or maybe not, for some.

If nothing else, however, Governor DeSantis also may be threatening the well-being of State retirees with this decision, by reducing the return on the State’s investment portfolio. Why? Studies have shown a positive relationship between ESG and financial performance. In other words, ESG-conscious companies earn more returns for investors.

One such study, conducted in 2021 by the NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business and Rockefeller Asset Management, looked at performance metrics from 2015-2020 and found a 58% positive relationship between ESG and financial performance. This study also notes: “In addition, in a recent study by Rockefeller, top quintile ESG improvers (based on Rockefellers’ proprietary ESG Improvers Score) outperformed bottom quintile ESG decliners by 3.8% annualized from 2010 to 2020.”

Large institutional investment houses such as Schwab also recently have developed ESG investment portfolio recommendations for their clients, as well as establishing its own ESG ETF. This is unlikely to happen unless ESG investing is at least potentially profitable and provides individual as well as institutional investors the option of allocating investments in a way aligned with their personal or corporate values. Nothing about that seems to smack of “corporate imposition” to me.

But then, what can you expect from a man who has gone to war with Mickey Mouse?

Environmental, Social, and corporate Governance (ESG) investing is big business these days as many global fund managers are required to use ESG criteria as part of their portfolio selection. According to NAVEX Global: “As of 2020, 88% of publicly traded companies, 79% of the venture and private equity-backed companies, and 67% of privately-owned companies had ESG initiatives in place.”

Today’s company fits in very nicely with regard to the data needed for ESG reports, particularly with regard to the food supply chain.

TrustBIX Inc. (TSXV: TBIX | OTCQB: TBIXF) offers a blockchain-based platform to trace food supply to achieve more trust, less waste, and reward sustainable behaviour. TrustBIX has two platforms ‘BIX’ (Business InfoXchange) and ‘ViewTrak’. BIX traces food from farm ‘Gate to Plate®’ to ensure that the food is sustainably produced. ViewTrak provides a suite of hardware and software solutions to the livestock industry.

TrustBIX expands its reach due to the completion of the ‘Insight’ acquisition

TrustBIX recently finalized the acquisition of a company called Insight Global Technology Inc. (Insight), which tracks and manages high-value agricultural and other equipment. TrustBIX CEO, Hubert Lau, stated: “Together with Insight, we will be combining our BIX technology and incentive solutions with Insight’s edge-to-enterprise supply chain solutions. With this expanded suite of offerings, we continue our commitment to expand our Gate-to-Plate® technologies for our customers.”

The purchase of Insight allows for TrustBIX to significantly expand their customer base well beyond the food supply chain. This is because Insight provides solutions to track, protect and identify the movement of high-value moveable equipment used in agriculture as well as other industries. Insight describes their business as “an edge-to-enterprise supply chain solution that brings asset situational awareness to dealers, rental fleets, and civil construction managers.”

Furthermore, the Insight acquisition has been executed strategically using TrustBIX equity. The brief details are: “The Insight shareholders will receive 10,000,000 Consideration Shares (subject to certain resale restrictions) on closing, and an additional amount of up to 20,000,000 Consideration Shares (subject to applicable escrow and resale restrictions) may be issued by the Company based on the satisfaction of certain financial metrics over the twelve months after the closing of the transaction.”

TrustBIX signs agreement with JBS Food Canada ULC

As announced on May 3, 2022, TrustBIX has also signed a master services agreement with JBS Food Canada ULC (“JBS Canada”). This is a big deal and may potentially open the door to a larger JBS deal in the future. JBS is one of the world’s largest food companies, which prepares, packages and delivers fresh, further-processed and value-added premium protein products for sale to customers in approximately 100 countries on 6 continents.

The news release states: “The companies will work as trusted partners to grow sustainable beef production in Canada. These services support the evolution of the JBS Angus beef brand with full chain of custody data tracking and analysis by the Company’s proprietary platform, BIX.”

David Colwell, President of JBS Canada, comments: “Food integrity is at the core of the JBS Canada Advantage, therefore working with the TrustBIX team will enhance the JBS journey to provide unmatched quality and service, along with accountability and transparency. JBS looks forward to developing a sustainable Angus beef program for our retail customers. We believe in this partnership with TrustBIX and their commitment to our sustainable beef program.”

TrustBIX sells software to help trace food and agricultural supply chains but has other uses also (energy monitoring, rewarding sustainable behaviour, tracing high value moveable equipment)

Source: TrustBIX website

Closing remarks

ESG investing is supported by data produced by companies using the best available software. TrustBIX continues to grow their offering of software products designed to support the industry to be able to produce the data needed for full chain of custody data tracking and analysis. The product producer and seller also benefit by having visibility over their supply chain. And finally the consumer benefits also by knowing the products they buy are coming from known sources.

TrustBIX’s recent news including the completion of the Insight acquisition and signing the JBS Canada agreement both speaks volumes for the direction in which TrustBIX is heading.

TrustBIX trades on a market cap of C$10 million.

In a recent InvestorIntel interview, Tracy Weslosky spoke with Justin Cochrane about Carbon Streaming Corporation’s (NEO: NETZ | OTCQB: OFSTF) focus on acquiring its high-quality portfolio of carbon credit streams and investments. Expanding on their 2022 strategic objectives, Justin touches on Carbon Streaming’s $200 million near-term potential pipeline of opportunities over the next 12-months “out of a total pipeline of $700 million.”

In this InvestorIntel interview, which may also be viewed on the InvestorIntel YouTube channel (click here to subscribe), Justin highlights plans to list Carbon Streaming on NASDAQ. Highlighting the growing interest in ESG directed investments, an increased focus on companies to reduce their carbon footprint, Justin explains how Carbon Streaming invests capital through carbon credit streaming arrangements with project developers and owners to accelerate the creation of carbon offset projects by bringing capital to projects that might not otherwise be developed.

To watch the full interview, click here

About Carbon Streaming Corporation:

Carbon Streaming is a unique ESG principled company offering investors exposure to carbon credits, a key instrument used by both governments and corporations to achieve their carbon neutral and net-zero climate goals. Our business model is focused on acquiring, managing and growing a high-quality and diversified portfolio of investments in projects and/or companies that generate or are actively involved, directly or indirectly, with voluntary and/or compliance carbon credits.

The Company invests capital through carbon credit streaming arrangements with project developers and owners to accelerate the creation of carbon offset projects by bringing capital to projects that might not otherwise be developed. Many of these projects will have significant social and economic co-benefits in addition to their carbon reduction or removal potential.

To learn more about Carbon Streaming Corporation, click here

Disclaimer: Carbon Streaming Corporation is an advertorial member of InvestorIntel Corp.

This interview, which was produced by InvestorIntel Corp. (IIC) does not contain, nor does it purport to contain, a summary of all the material information concerning the “Company” being interviewed. IIC offers no representations or warranties that any of the information contained in this interview is accurate or complete.

This presentation may contain“forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and assumptions of the management of the Company as of the date made. They are inherently susceptible to uncertainty and other factors that could cause actual events/results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Additional risks and uncertainties, including those that the Company does not know about now or that it currently deems immaterial, may also adversely affect the Company’s business or any investment therein.

Any projections given are principally intended for use as objectives and are not intended, and should not be taken,  as assurances that the projected results will be obtained by the Company. The assumptions used may not prove to be accurate and a potential decline in the Company’s financial condition or results of operations may negatively impact the value of its securities. Prospective investors are urged to review the Company’s profile on Sedar.com and to carry out independent investigations in order to determine their interest in investing in the Company.

If you have any questions surrounding the content of this interview, please contact us at +1 416 792 8228 and/or email us direct at [email protected].

One of the biggest trends today is ESG investing. That is investors now demand companies operate in a sustainable way with a focus on Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG). Both customers and investors want to know the details of a company’s ESG practices. A key part of this is examining the supply chain.

Security of supply chains and traceability of products has become essential in today’s world. Look at the current sanctions on Russia and the need to trace products supply to be sure it is not coming from dictators, such as the Putin regime.

Today’s company is focused on supporting companies with the right tools to help meet their ESG obligations. Their initial focus has been on the agri-food industry but there is potential to expand across many other sectors.

TrustBIX Inc. (TSXV: TBIX | OTCQB: TBIXF) offers a blockchain based platform to trace food supply and reward sustainability. TrustBIX has two platforms – BIX which stands for ‘Business InfoXchange’, and the other platform is called ‘ViewTrak’. The Company has also recently acquired a company (Insight) that tracks and manages high-value agricultural and other equipment.

BIX – Traces food from farm ‘Gate to Plate®’ to ensure that the food is sustainably produced. The BIX platform has over 1,500 producers registered who track cattle as part of Strategic Sourcing through Cargill for McDonald’s Canada and other restaurants.

ViewTrak – Provides a suite of hardware and software solutions to the livestock industry in Canada, United States, Mexico and China. TrustBIX says that ViewTrak has an 80% and 30% share respectively in the Canadian and US Live Cattle Auction Market software automation space.

TrustBIX continues to work with Cargill and acquires Insight Global Technology Inc.

In February the Company announced an “innovation agreement” to continue working with Cargill in Canada. The agreement will see TrustBIX provide strategic advisory and technology innovation services. The report states: “This next phase of partnership will explore how to create more efficiencies in the delivery of the program to further advance Cargill’s commitments to sustainable sourcing of Canadian beef.”

In March TrustBIX announced the signing of Definitive Agreement to acquire 100% of Insight Global Technology Inc. (Insight) for up to 30,000,000 common shares of TrustBIX priced at $0.18 per share. The deal closed successfully as announced on March 7, 2022.

Insight is an early stage company providing solutions to track, protect and identify the movement of high value moveable equipment used in agriculture and other industries. This is quite the expansion for TrustBIX from their core area of food traceability.

TrustBIX CEO Hubert Lau stated: “I am very excited about the acquisition of Insight, which is a major milestone for TrustBIX. We are confident that the acquisition will help us expand our BIX platform, enhance our value in supply chains, and enable us to better serve our clients with a more diversified set of products and services. We believe Insight will assist us to drive growth and shareholder value in the months and years ahead.”

Insight is essentially an asset tracking platform that tracks, identifies, and reports a client’s assets with self-reporting asset trackers.

Insight is a system of record and visualization service for asset tracking and management

Source: Insight website

TrustBIX achieved record annual revenue in 2021

As reported on February 2022, TrustBIX posted first quarter revenue of $422,261 for the last 3 calendar months of 2021. That compares to all of 2021 revenue of C$2.17 million, which was up from C$1.63 million in 2021. You can view here for details on the recent capital raise.

Next steps

TrustBIX states their business strategy is to continue to expand organically and by acquisition. The Company also plans to combine the BIX technology and incentive solutions with Insight’s edge-to-enterprise supply chain solutions.

Alex Barendregt, founder of Insight, stated: “We are more than excited for this great opportunity to bring together our technology platforms to be deployed as a unified solution within TrustBIX. We look forward to closely working with the TrustBIX team in implementing this complimentary line of business.”

Closing remarks

TrustBIX is still relatively small but is growing both organically and via smart acquisitions. The Company now effectively has three platforms – BIX, ViewTrak and Insight. These can be combined to create an ever greater ESG package for companies to trace, track, and manage their supply chain and assets.

TrustBIX trades on a market cap of C$6.6 million. It is still early days for TrustBIX but so far management is doing everything right. One to watch in 2022.