Tag Archives: sustainability

Eclipse Ventures Launches Framework to Quantify Climate Impact Potential for Technologies Disrupting Physical Industries

Eclipse Ventures is a VC firm based in Palo Alto, CA. Their goal here is to provide venture investors with information on the carbon reduction potential of different technologies for physical industries. It actually goes further to identify a few companies working on each sort of technology. For investors, it gives a tool to estimate the market for a technology and an indication of how a startup might perform.

It does so using an open platform called CRANE, which they claim will soon be open-source. CRANE was developed by Prime Coalition, a climate non-profit, and Rho Impact, a climate advisory service.

The idea of such a tool is to encourage investors to back firms that will genuinely reduce carbon impact. Time will tell if people will use the tool, and also how accurate its prognostication is.

I am usually quite skeptical of ‘black-box’ predictors and analytical tools. It’s important to understand how they are actually doing the computations.

However, physical industries are major contributors to carbon pollution, and offer a tremendous opportunity for carbon reduction. Any way we measure it, reducing carbon output in those industries is a priority. Clearly identifying startups that could make an impact in those physical areas would be good.

We can couple that with the fact that physical industry startups have different requirements from software and artificial intelligence startups. They need substantial early funding, because their physical solutions require a test bed. And they need to be located near the physical processes they are trying to improve, rather than in some incubator or accelerator near the money sources.

Physical products from the start need to deal with serviceability. The ability to service the product must be designed in from the start. Products that fail to be serviceable will never be selected by operations people.

Software, on the other hand, follows a development path using a minimum viable product, which meets some customer needs, but not others. Software developers today rely on feedback from users to make the product more serviceable. Early adopters provide that input and drive the serviceability trajectory. And the engineers, or a few added customer engineers, can provide the support. As more and more users appear, they need more and more help and place larger demands on the software firm. Eventually, if a software firm is successful, the service of existing customers becomes much more important and more costly than new development. This trajectory has played out so often in the software industry as to be a cliche.

But the big jump in software service expense most often occurs long after the firm has exited the VC or early funding stages, either through an IPO or private placement or through sale to a large company. Early investors no longer have responsibility for the financing. So the venture investors don’t care.

This phenomenon explains why software ventures get funded more easily than physical product ventures.

I’m glad to see someone trying to make the case for physical industry investment, especially for sustainability and carbon intensity.

Full report: https://eclipse.vc/eco-report/

NEWS PROVIDED BY Eclipse Ventures 

Aug 10, 2022, 09:00 ET

Eclipse Ventures Launches Framework to Quantify Climate Impact Potential for Technologies Disrupting Physical Industries

Liners get a preview of alternative fuel costs

A new technical and commercial comparison of alternative fuels for ocean carriers compares expected bunker costs for different size and differently equipped ships. Alphaliner, a consultancy for ocean carriers, has reviewed that comparison.

Alphaliner’s review shows the ship owner and operator what they can expect in economy over the next few years. The results indicate that as the new regulations for CO2 emissions kick in, fuel costs will become a much larger percentage of total ship operating costs, perhaps double, or even more.

For instance, the graph they publish shows fuel costs for differently equipped Megamax-24 (MGX-24) ships. A megamax-24 ship is typically 400 meters long and 61 meters wide, with a depth of about 33.2 meters. It should carry around 23,500 twenty-foot equivalent (TEU) containers (Alphaliner newsletter).

The graph compares use of fossil fuels, bio fuels, and power-to-fuel (PtX) fuels (read about them). The PtX fuels convert renewable sources such as wind, sun, hydro, and geothermal, to fuel products such as hydrogen, ammonia, or products containing carbon, such as syn-crude. If carbon is used in the PtX process it should be from non-fossil sources or unavoidable industrial carbon emissions capture and reuse.

Source: Splash247 article.

Even bio-fuels cost a lot more than conventional fuels when all the upstream supply chain emissions are considered, for these very large ships.

The graph seems to imply that scrubbers are still a very important technology in the fight to clear the air. And LNG has a role to play, though it might be temporary. At their best, the PtX technologies such as electric-powered ships are comparable to or better than bio-fueled vessels.

There’s clearly a long way to go for ocean shipping to go where it needs to in the race to clean up global emissions.

However, some of these non-fossil technologies will adapt over the next few years, and costs will come down. It’s hard to do much more with the fossil fuel technology.

The argument Alphaliner makes is that soon fixed costs will be a smaller part of the total cost of a large ship than fuel operating costs. As these proportions change, emphasis will come more on building ships with desirable emissions control power systems, since the availability and price of fuel will be driving overall costs.

That’s an interesting point. We will see the extent to which it influences the next generation or two of ship orders.

Sam Chambers July 27, 2022

Liners get a preview of alternative fuel costs – Splash247

Trucking industry concerned about SEC’s proposed climate rules

This article is interesting because of the dilemma of small trucking firms. The SEC will soon require disclosure of climate impact by companies, which will include how they ship their goods. There are scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 emissions. Scope 3 emissions come from the partners used in supply chains. That would mean documenting the emissions from trucking and other cargo movements. It would include also outbound logistics, such as Amazon Prime. Shipper firms would require their suppliers to provide the required information about their emissions. Smaller firms might be at a disadvantage, having to invest in the equipment and people to monitor those emissions and make improvements. Small truck lines think that would offer an unfair advantage to large carriers, because customers would require this information to participate in bidding.

According to the first article by Alyssa Sporrer, large trucking firms support the SEC disclosure rules. That’s because they are already serious about their sustainability efforts, especially environmentally, and it will give them a chance to showcase their efforts.

Sustainability is also in the news in California. CARB, a state agency, has $125 million available for funding for clean off-road equipment, such as that used in ports and freight yards. The program is administered by Calstart, a clean transportation nonprofit. The equipment must be zero-emission, which means electric for the most part. Most of the equipment will be for terminal tractors, on and off-road, refrigeration units, cargo handling equipment, railcar movers and switchers, and airport ground support equipment.

The nice thing about this program is that it does not require firms to retire existing equipment.

The Calstart program prides itself on putting money to work for reduced emissions in places like port communities where excess emissions have caused health problems in the past.

Alyssa Sporrer Thursday, July 14, 2022

Trucking industry concerned about SEC’s proposed climate rules – FreightWaves

Alyssa Sporrer Monday, July 18, 2022

California offers up to $500,000 for purchases of zero-emissions equipment – FreightWaves