From your perspective, are we seeing the research work being done in those three waste stream areas that we need to get done in order to attack the problem you're identifying, in which there seems to be potential, without actually using other resources—no more water, no more arable land—to actually have an increase in production simply because we lose less?
In the industrial world, scrap costs you money, so that if you have waste, it's a cost. It seems that in the food world, the agricultural world, we have a huge scrap value, and yet we're not attacking it as a huge cost to us per se. It's seen as another value added rather than a huge cost that we have lost. It seems to me there needs to be a transformation in thinking, in some sense, to seeing this as a huge cost to us rather than a potential for earning a living from it.