Technologies
AI Health Coaches: The Next Frontier in Wearables or Privacy Nightmare?
We should probably brace for both.
I’ve been tracking biometric data about my body since what feels like the dawn of time (or at least the dawn of wearables). I ran a half-marathon with the first Fitbit tracker, reviewed the very first Apple Watch and used the first smartphone-connected thermometer for ovulation tracking back when it was a pen-and-paper operation for most.Â
Collecting data about my body isn’t just second nature; it’s practically part of my job description. And for years, it’s been entirely on me to overanalyze that mountain of metrics and figure out how to turn it into something useful.
So when AI health coaches started surfacing from Google, Samsung, Apple, Oura and others, promising to shoulder that mental load, I was all in. You mean to tell me I don’t have to decode every tiny fluctuation in my data on my own anymore?Â
Most of us can’t afford a real-life wellness coach to meal-prep for us, hype us up midworkout or pry the dumbbells from our fever-wrought hands when we’re at the gym looking like a walking Flonase commercial. An AI coach felt like the next best thing: a nerdy, data-obsessed friend living in my phone, armed with years of my biometrics and the patience to explain them without judgment.
Over the last year, I tried them all, or at least the early versions of what they’ll eventually become. Personal trainers built into fitness apps. Chatbots tucked behind wearable dashboards. Coaches that whisper advice into your earbuds or nudge you from your smartwatch. Some free, some paid.Â
But so far, none has been game-changing in the way I’d hoped, and the trade-offs of handing over my health data often felt like a high price to pay. The dream in my head doesn’t quite match the reality taking shape.Â
Like with any new tech, it takes a while to weigh the long-term cost versus the short-term reward. But one thing is clear: This isn’t a passing trend. AI-driven health tech is poised to reshape personal health care in a way that smartwatches and smart rings haven’t yet.Â
In the best-case scenario, AI health apps and programs could help fill gaps in care and serve as a lifeline in communities with limited access to wellness information. In the worst-case scenario, they could open the floodgates to a privacy nightmare and mishandle medical data. Where this all lands depends on how we choose to use AI coaches and what guardrails are built around them.
Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.
AI in wearables isn’t new, but now it’s going rogue
The use of AI in health care, wellness and fitness has exploded in the last year, but the technology has been baked into the wearable experience for much longer. High heart-rate alerts, fall detection, even sleep scores… that’s all AI working behind the scenes.
According to Karin Verspoor, dean of the School of Computing Technologies at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, this type of AI is referred to as predictive modeling. “It’s a targeted tool that’s been trained to identify a particular type of event.”
In the case of these wearables, the “task” is looking for patterns outside the normal baseline and surfacing them as an alert. They’re precise and predictable.
But now we’re veering into something different and much harder to control: generative AI. With these full-on concierge-style chatbot models, not much different from ChatGPT or Gemini, any topic is fair game: heart rate patterns, premenstrual mood swings, diet tips or even medical recommendations (the latter, thankfully, usually prompts you to check with a human physician). The caveat is that these “health coaches” have an all-access pass to your most sensitive health data in real time.
“Large language AI models are essentially much more dynamic and much more responsive to whatever somebody puts into the prompt, and whatever the ongoing interaction with the system is,” says Verspoor. The problem, she notes, is that they’re also “subject to all of the problems that we have with large language models like confabulations or hallucinations.”Â
Over the past 18 months, it seems like nearly every major tech and fitness brand has launched its own version of an AI coach or chatbot-style concierge, and if they haven’t, they’re very likely considering it.Â
Google is testing an AI coach inside the Fitbit app, built on Gemini. Apple has released a Workout Buddy for the Apple Watch that offers real-time motivation via headphones based on live metrics during workouts, and is rumored to be exploring some kind of ChatGPT integration in its Health app. Samsung, Garmin, Oura and iFit have all rolled out AI features across their apps and wearable devices, while Meta has partnered with Garmin and Oakley to embed its Meta AI voice assistant into smart workout glasses.
That’s just a snapshot of the AI health coaches I’ve personally tested, and a fraction of what’s likely in development. Only Google’s is explicitly labeled a “coach,” but for the purposes of this article, they all fall under the same umbrella of AI health coaches.
Some of these features feel promising. Meta AI, for example, can read your Garmin heart-rate data into your ear through the glasses’ speakers so you don’t have to take your eyes off the trail. Or you might get training and rest-day recommendations based on how you slept and other physical data.Â
Other features, however, still feel half-baked. Samsung’s running coach, for example, offered a one-size-fits-all training plan that didn’t match my goals or experience. Â
In theory, these models should improve over time as they learn individual patterns and as people like me find better ways to leverage them. For now, though, most remain in their infancy, far from the full potential they’re meant to be: an always-available adviser, designed to make sense of the ever-growing pile of health data collected through wearables.
Best-case scenario: AI to the rescue
The current health care model in the US is overdue for a transformation. The system is overburdened, prohibitively expensive and facing demand that outpaces supply, especially in rural areas with limited access to doctors and medical equipment.
Dr. Jonathan Chen, professor of medicine and the director for medical education in artificial intelligence at Stanford, is optimistic that AI could play a constructive role in easing some of that pressure, especially when it comes to making sense of all the health information and clinical data in patient records.Â
“We already have ways to collect data for people all the time, but even your doctor doesn’t know what to do with all that data in the ICU, let alone all the wearable data,” says Chen.
AI, he argues, can help bridge that gap by synthesizing information in ways that actually matter, such as flagging warning signs of potentially life-threatening conditions like hypertension before they become fatal. Having a personal health concierge at your fingertips could help you focus more intimately on wellness and encourage behavioral changes that reduce the risk of chronic illness over time.
“Even though the actionable insight might not be that different,” said Chen, “when it feels personalized, that might be a way some people will engage deeper.” Chen emphasizes that AI works best when it drives better conversations, not when it replaces them. He points to glucose monitoring as an example: Instead of walking into an appointment with a month of raw data, AI could review that information ahead of time and surface patterns and actionable insights to guide the discussion.
I’ve seen that best-case scenario play out firsthand. A close family member began receiving irregular heart rhythm notifications from an Apple Watch. The alerts had never appeared during a routine doctor visit, nor after wearing a clinical heart monitor at home for weeks. When the watch flagged an episode in real time, he got in front of a doctor, confirmed the diagnosis with an ECG and took action. A few months later, he underwent a heart procedure that significantly reduced his risk of a potentially life-threatening event. In that case, the wearable didn’t replace medical care, but did exactly what it was meant to do: surface a signal, start a conversation and help close a dangerous gap in care.
But that same dynamic can just as easily tip in the other direction. False positives and over-indexing on minor deviations could lead to unnecessary tests and screenings, adding strain to an already overwhelmed health care system.
“Is there going to be a storm of patients banging on the doctor’s door? ‘My Apple Watch, my Fitbit told me I have some heart condition,'” says Chen. “‘You have to give me 100 scans right now and start me on medication.’ Like, whoa, whoa, whoa, buddy⊠Let’s take a look first. Let’s see what’s really there.”
It’s a familiar tension; an upgraded version of the Dr. Google era when even the most innocent search about a rash could spiral into a late-night panic over flesh-eating bacteria.Â
Pay to play: The price of privacy
My biggest concern when I started using these AI coaches was data sharing and privacy. Asking ChatGPT about a rash is one thing, but giving a chatbot access to my entire medical history is a completely different beast. Many of these health platforms contain years of my biometric data, along with my medical ID, which includes blood type and allergies.Â
The alternative is not to use them at all. In many cases, these AI coaches rely on a pay-to-play model, with some requiring an actual subscription. But the real payment is your data. “We can’t have reliable predictive models or generative models without having access to data of some variety,” says Verspoor.
The amount you give up and how it’s used varies by platform, but signing up involves wading through dense disclosures: permission to use your historical and real-time biometric data, location info and chat history to train other models. We’ve become so desensitized to these agreements that most people (myself included) aren’t even sure what we’re giving up anymore.Â
That confusion isn’t accidental. The language is often intentionally vague and nearly impossible to understand without a law degree. In my case, for example, using Oakley’s smart glasses required agreeing to let my data be used to train Meta’s AI.Â
A recent privacy analysis by the Electronic Privacy Information Center found that the health-related data people assumed was private (including searches, browsing behavior and information entered into health platforms) is often collected and shared far beyond its original context. In one case, data entered on a state health insurance marketplace was tracked and sent to third parties, such as LinkedIn, for advertising purposes. Much of this information falls outside HIPAA protections, meaning it can be legally repurposed or sold in ways consumers never intended.
Even when anonymized, health data can often be traced back to a real person and even used by insurance agencies to raise premiums.Â
“You can deidentify and can make it harder to tell, but if someone tried really hard, it’s actually not that hard to use statistical methods to reconstruct who’s actually who,” says Chen.Â
Data breaches and hacks are just the tip of the iceberg. We often have little visibility into how long data will be stored, who it might be shared with or where it could end up years down the line. Chen points to 23andMe as a cautionary tale. The company had promised privacy and security, until financial trouble put massive amounts of genetic data in jeopardy.
“They’ll keep it secure and private, but then they go bankrupt. And so now they’re just going to sell all their assets to whoever wants to buy it.”
AI health coach: friend or foe?
The reality, at least in the short term, is likely less extreme than either of those scenarios. We’re probably not on the verge of AI saving health care, or of selling our most sensitive health data to the highest bidder.Â
As Verspoor points out, the pay-to-play model isn’t exclusive to AI health coaches. Tech companies have been using personal data to power products long before generative AI entered the chat. Your search history may not look like an ECG, but it can be just as revealing about life stages, health anxieties or illness history.Â
With AI health coaches having a direct line to real-time biometric data, it’s more important than ever for people to pay close attention to what data they’re signing off on and who they’re handing it to. Is that information staying on-device? Is it being shared with third parties? And what happens to it down the line? This requires people to be in the driver’s seat when signing up and to read the fine print, even if it means having to copy and paste it into yet another AI chatbot to translate the legal jargon. Then weigh whether the exchange is worth it to you.Â
Chen believes the potential upside still outweighs the risks, especially if these tools succeed at getting people to care more about their health and engage with it more often. That engagement, he argues, is where the real value lies so long as AI remains a supplement to care, not a substitute for it. Both experts agree AI health coaches should function as ancillary tools to help you understand your data, ask better questions and jump-start conversations with your doctor.Â
AI coaches may know your day-to-day vitals, but they still have blind spots when it comes to real-world context and medical-grade testing. Their advice, no matter how innocuous and obvious it may sound, like “hydrate after a bad night of sleep,” should be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism. Unlike tools such as ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini, some AI health coaches, including Google’s Fitbit Coach and Oura’s Advisor, don’t clearly cite sources or explain where their recommendations come from, at least not yet.
The tipping pointÂ
The reality, at the moment, is less dramatic than either of these extremes. We’re probably not on the brink of AI saving health care, or of plummeting into a full-blown medical data dystopia. Instead, we’re in this awkward in-between phase.Â
I was initially excited about the idea of an AI health coach taking some of the mental load off interpreting my health data. That quickly turned to skepticism as the privacy trade-offs became apparent. Now, after months of testing, I’ve landed somewhere else entirely: Most days, I forget the tool is there in the first place.Â
That gap between insight and action is something human coaches have long understood. Jonathan Goodman, a fitness coach and author of Unhinged Habits, says AI excels at processing data, but behavior change rarely hinges on perfect metrics or the perfect training plan.Â
“For a general-population human who just needs to move a little bit more, eat a little bit better, and play with their kids, it’s probably closer to 10% technical and 90% psychological,” he says. Metrics can surface patterns, but coaching is about asking the right questions, fitting movement into real life and recognizing those moments when someone is ready to push themselves into real transformation.Â
To me, it’s that in-the-moment guidance, pushing me past my limit or telling me when to scale back, that’s missing from these AI coaches. The experience is largely passive, often requiring you to check the app to see that day’s training plan. Apple’s Workout Buddy might be the closest to that, with real-time motivation based on your stats, but even that stops short of actual coaching. And none has proven indispensable enough to make me seek it out consistently.Â
To reach that tipping point, these companies will need to give us stronger reasons to engage and clearer safeguards to justify handing over our deeply personal health data.Â
Technologies
AI is Changing How Lawyers Work â and Putting the Billable Hour Under Pressure
AI is reshaping the legal industry by reducing the time needed for routine tasks, challenging the traditional billable hour model, and changing how lawyers learn and practice.
Artificial intelligence is now used by almost 90% of legal professionals in the U.K. and Ireland, and itâs putting one of the professionâs oldest conventions â the billable hour â under the microscope. Thatâs according to legal software company Clioâs U.K. & Ireland Legal Insights Report 2026.
It found that among firms using AI, almost 80% said they can handle more work without increasing resources, while over 70% said it cut costs by absorbing administrative work once done by support staff.
As a result, AI is challenging some of the assumptions on which the legal profession was built, forcing firms to reevaluate how their lawyers spend their time, how they charge for it and how new lawyers learn the ropes. You canât charge 16 hours for something that takes 16 secondsNick Rowles-DaviesLexolent Some of the U.K.âs biggest firms are already putting this into practice.
A&O Shearman has worked with legal AI company Harvey to develop artificial intelligence agents for tasks, including reviewing loan agreements and analyzing regulatory filings, which it says can complete in minutes work that previously took several hours. Slaughter and May, meanwhile, has rolled out Harvey across all practice areas this year, including for regulatory research and document analysis.
Billable hour pressure The billable hour is central to the business model of many law firms, but when AI significantly reduces the time lawyers spend sifting through and drafting documents, the economics are no longer so straightforward. âYou canât charge 16 hours for something that takes 16 seconds,â Nick Rowles-Davies, founder and CEO of legal finance fund Lexolent, based in London and Dubai, told CNBC.
About one in five firms that have widely adopted AI report difficulty meeting billable-hour targets, according to Clioâs report. Globally, senior legal leaders expect the share of work charged by the hour to fall from 72% to 44% over the next two to three years, according to a Deloitte survey.
Routine work is the most exposed, Rowles-Davies said. âIf youâve got standard documents and youâre just putting in detail, then clearly thatâs an automatic process.â But complex legal work still requires human judgment, he added, particularly when interpreting AI output and determining the right strategy for a client.
Lawyers [are] telling us that their day is getting betterJoshua LenonClio
AI and workloads
Whether AI efficiencies ultimately make lawyersâ working lives better may depend on what firms do with the time they get back. Clioâs report found that 51% of legal professionals work evenings, but only 32% want to, while 22% work weekends compared with 11% who would choose to.
Joshua Lenon, Clioâs New York-based lawyer-in-residence, believes some lawyers are already seeing the benefits. âLawyers [are] telling us that their day is getting better,â Lenon told CNBC, as AI becomes more commonplace.
âPeople are really looking at these tools and saying, âThis is making work better.ââ
Technologies
Trump’s diesel agreement with Putin accused of contradicting Russia sanctions law
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a searing statement that the U.S. easing sanctions on Moscow “plays into Russia’s hands.”
President Donald Trumpâs Friday announcement that Russia will supply diesel fuel to the global market marked an apparent pivot from recent efforts to pressure Moscow to end the Ukraine war by targeting Russian energy exports.
Trump claimed the move, unveiled with less than a month left in an affordability-focused midterm election, would swiftly bring down record-high diesel prices.
But commentators and critics were quick to highlight contradictions between the new policy and prior efforts by the U.S. to clamp down on Russian oil sales.
Those efforts most recently included the enactment of the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, empowering Trump to impose tariffs up to 100% on the top purchasers of Russian crude oil or gas, among other restrictions. Trump signed the bill into law just three weeks ago.
âCongress just passed a law giving Trump the power to impose new tariffs on major buyers of Russian oil & gas,â Scott Lincicome, vice president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said on X after Trumpâs Friday announcement.
âCan America tariff America?â he quipped.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a member of the Senate Ukraine Caucus, accused Trumpâs latest move of being âdirectly contrary to Congressâs intent in our bipartisan sanctions bill.â
Peter Harrell, visiting scholar at Georgetown University Law Centerâs Institute of International Economic Law, in an X post said that the relaxation of Russian diesel restrictions âpretty much proves the point that the Graham Russia Bill was not going to force the Trump Administration to increase economic pressure on Moscow.â
Some of the criticism crossed party lines.
âThrough the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, we gave the president significant authorities and leverage against China and Russia to bring Putinâs war to an end with a negotiated settlement,â Rep.
Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said in an X post. âUnfortunately, while I understand the desire to bring down diesel prices, I am concerned the lifting of sanctions on Russian oil will only fund the Kremlinâs war machineâemboldening more violence and destruction, as we have seen in recent days,â McCaul said.
The White House did not immediately respond to CNBCâs questions about the diesel agreement with Russia.
Less than a year earlier, the Trump administration slapped sanctions on multiple Russian oil companies in response to what it called âRussiaâs lack of serious commitment to a peace process to end the war in Ukraine.â
Trump also had previously slammed NATO allies for continuing to buy Russian oil. In a September 2025 Truth Social post, he wrote, âthe purchase of Russian Oil, by some, has been shocking! It greatly weakens your negotiating position, and bargaining power, over Russia.â
Later that month, Trump again harangued world leaders for doing business with Russia.
âTheyâre funding the war against themselves. Who the hell ever heard of that one?â he said in a speech at the United Nations General Assembly. âThey canât be doing what theyâre doing. Theyâre buying oil and gas from Russia while theyâre fighting Russia.â
Trump announced the diesel deal in a Truth Social post Friday afternoon after what he described as a âhighly successful discussionâ with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Under the agreement, Russia will immediately supply more than 300,000 tons of diesel, then another 500,000 tons in November, followed by 1 million tons âimmediately thereafterâ and 3 million more depending on refinery conditions, Trump wrote.
The Treasury Department soon after said that Trump directed the Office of Foreign Assets Control to immediately issue a âtemporary general license to allow the supply of Russian diesel to the global market.â OFAC specified that the sanctioned transactions will be authorized for about six months, until April 7.
Russia seemed to celebrate the move. âRussia-US cooperation on diesel and energy will benefit the world,â an X account associated with Putinâs economic envoy Kirill Dmitriev said in response to the announcement.
But Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose military has started targeting Russian oil refineries, said in a searing statement that the U.S. easing sanctions on Moscow âplays into Russiaâs hands.â
âAny easing of sanctions against Russia without a clear and lasting de-escalation agreement with Russia is an obvious weakness,â Zelenskyy said. âAllowing Russia to sell petroleum products is an investment in a war that must be ended, not prolonged.â
âWe count on Americaâs fair support for our defense of life, for our defense of people in Ukraine â and on the United States having a correspondingly strong conversation with Russia,â he said.
âA strong one, not a weak one,â he added.
Trump thanked Putin later Friday afternoon for enabling âmassive amounts of oilâ to come to the U.S.
âWe need oil for the world, and this is diesel, which is what we need, so weâre very happy to get it,â Trump told reporters before heading to Syracuse, New York.
The Trump administration has previously eased some Russian energy sanctions temporarily, though more narrowly than Fridayâs announcement.
Earlier this year, in an attempt to stabilize markets after the start of the Iran war, the Trump administration issued limited, 30-day waivers allowing countries to buy sanctioned Russian oil that was already in transit.
But some interpreted the latest move as a more significant step.
âIt looks like Trump cut a deal with the devil,â Jeremy Siegel, professor emeritus of finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, told CNBCâs âClosing Bellâ Friday afternoon.
âItâs not a permanent solution at all. Itâs sort of a short-term Band Aid,â Siegel said. âAnd cutting back on or eliminating sanctions on Russia for the invasion in Ukraine, I think, is a very unfortunate consequence.â
Technologies
The world needs Ukraineâs grain. Its farmers are running out of reasons to plant
Cash-strapped farmers have no incentive to sow for 2027 with exports remaining trapped, as analysts say commodity markets could “flip fast.”
Ukraineâs harvest season is moving from wheat and barley into corn, soybeans and sunflower, and farmer Oleksandr Chumak has had a strong yield so far. That should be good news.
Instead, after 11 years of growing a range of crops in the Odesa region of southern Ukraine, Chumak has had enough.
Storage facilities across both Ukraine and Russia are filled with millions of tons of produce that would normally be sent to Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa â but are instead trapped in the warring countries.
Russian drone and missile hits on Black Sea targets intensified over the summer and into fall, making it impossible to insure commercial ships. Kyivâs retaliatory attacks mean Russian exports are now also stuck, further squeezing global supply.
And with fatal Black Sea attacks continuing into October, prospects of a ceasefire look slim, even as Turkey ramps up efforts to broker a deal due to the risk to global food security.
Chumak says that around 80% of his grain cannot currently be sold at a profit, and he is out of cash.
A collapse in domestic prices is giving farmers like him little reason to sow for the 2027 crop in the coming months.
âFor the farmers, itâs very difficult because we need to pay taxes, we need to pay rent for land, and now we are not able to do this because we are not able to sell anything,â said Andrii Dykun, chairman of the Ukrainian Agri Council.
âThe only crops we are able to sell are rapeseeds and sunflower seeds. But still, the volume is not enough… So why should we plant if today we have no profits at all?â
âIf our stocks will be full, it makes no sense to do any farm operations in the spring because then itâs just a waste of time and money.â
PrivatBank, Ukraineâs biggest lender, told CNBC that it had disbursed 1.53 billion hryvnia ($34.2 million) in working capital finance to agribusinesses between June and August, more than double the 718 million hryvnia lent in the same period last year. Small and medium-sized producers account for 70% of its agricultural loan book.
âFunds effectively remain tied up in grain inventories, while farms still need to cover their ongoing operating expenses and secure financing for the autumn and spring sowing campaigns,â said Yevhen Zaihraiev, chief corporate and SME business officer at state-owned PrivatBank.
âWe are seeing different strategies among our clients. Some agricultural producers are selling their crops sooner, even at less attractive prices, in order to maintain sufficient operating liquidity. Others, particularly those with access to storage capacity, are postponing sales in anticipation of more favorable market prices,â he said by email.
Ukrainian production of grains and oilseeds is forecast to increase to 85 million tonnes from 80 million tonnes this year, but carry-over stocks from the previous season are pressuring Ukraineâs storage infrastructure and logistics, Zaihraiev noted. Those facilities include long plastic silobags snaking across fields and towering metal grain elevators that are themselves increasingly vulnerable to military strikes.
âWe are also seeing agricultural producers gradually revise their planting plans for next year in favor of oilseeds and niche crops, whose prices are less dependent on logistics costs,â Zaihraiev added.
Farmer Oleksandr Chumak said he will follow that strategy, significantly scaling back planting for next year, avoiding corn and barley altogether, and instead opt for crops which require less fertilizer â which is also facing a global squeeze following amid the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.
Meanwhile, for Ukrainian farmers â those not currently being drafted to serve â the war with Russia is ever-present. âWe are living and working in a place where any time you or your circle can be hit by [a] rocket or drone,â Chumak said by phone. âWe are sleeping in beds with explosions 300 to 1,000 metres around.â
Stock release would âflip the market fastâ
Ukraineâs agricultural sector has faced farm takeovers, mines and labor shortages ever since Russiaâs full-scale assault began in early 2022. International bodies have struggled to preserve its export routes through various agreements, including the collapsed Black Sea initiative and the European Unionâs politically contentious âSolidarity Lanes.â
Now, the situation inside the country and the consequences for global food chains are the most severe they have been since the war began.
Between them, Ukraine and Russia supplied the world with more than half of its sunflower oil, nearly a fifth of its barley and 14% of its wheat in the years leading up to the war, according to the UN. Ukraine is also one of the worldâs biggest growers of corn, with China and the European Union among its biggest buyers.
Around 90% of Ukraineâs main agricultural exports typically run via the Black Sea. In August this year, its grain and legume exports totalled 981,000 tonnes, down about 58% year on year.
The risk is heightened by weakness elsewhere. Europe is expected to have a particularly poor corn harvest and needs larger imports just as its demand for feed remains high. The United States is also facing a weaker corn crop.
For now, better wheat and barley crops in Canada, Australia and Argentina, along with good harvests in the Middle East and North Africa, are cushioning the blow.
The continued blockage is supporting commodity prices outside of Russia and Ukraine, but the reopening of Black Sea ports would unleash a wave of cheap supply that would âflip the market fast… with little warning,â said Benoit Fayaud, senior manager for grains and oilseeds analysis at Expana.
A deal which restores Ukrainian and Russian exports could see grains prices in other origins decrease by a few dozen dollars, he told CNBC. âThey have such big stocks it will be bearish for the market all over the world,â he added.
Prices for Russian and Ukrainian wheat, barley, oilseeds and other products have become so low within the countries that it has intensified the scramble to find alternative routes via rail, road and river, according to Fayaud.
But these alternative routes are âdifficult and slow from both countries,â he said.
Ukraineâs Eastern European neighbors such as Poland and Romania are resisting a push to allow grain to transit through them â even temporarily â due to concerns about a glut destroying demand for their own crops.
Another option via the Danube river has been hampered by low water levels; and a key bridge out of Ukraine has been damaged. There are options to export via the Baltic states and through Georgia by land into the Middle East and Central Asia, but this can only cover a small portion of typical flows, Fayaud said.
Andrii Dykun of the Ukrainian Agri Council stressed that there was no alternative to the Black Sea routes when it came to pricing.
âIt would always be cheaper for us, even for the farmers on the western border of Ukraine, to sell the grain to other ports from Black Sea ports because itâs much more profitable for the farmers than to sell it via the border to [the] EU,â he said.
âSo without Black Sea ports, it will not work for us at all.â
-
Technologies4 years agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies5 years agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 years agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies5 years agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 years agoThe number of ĐĄrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
-
Technologies5 years agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies5 years agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies5 years agoiPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow
