It was fascinating to see this new study come out, suggesting that soot from deforestation, home cooking fires, coal-fired power, etc., has a significant role to play in climate change. What was particularly important as a takeaway was that soot is more readily addressable as a near-term climate change driver.
We all see entrepreneurial efforts to get cleaner-burning fuels and equipment implemented across developing economies—in the last few months I’ve seen plans for solar cooking stoves, rice husk-fired generators, and microbial fuel cells, all with the idea of bringing electricity and heat to various developing regions, while minimizing the use of “dirty” biomass fuels more commonly used today. For many investors with a North American focus (such as myself), these and other regions are simply not part of our funds’ investment mandates, but even for investors with a global mandate these investment opportunities can be difficult to get behind. Lack of proprietary technology (a solar cooking stove, for example, is essentially just a polished metal reflector), highly scattered target customer base, and low purchasing power leading necessarily to low prices—all of these and other reasons are why institutional venture capitalists haven’t traditionally targeted these “bottom of the pyramid” investments. It’s a capital gap—and an important one, because there are some significant needs out there in terms of sustainable development and the role that technology (even “low-tech”) can play.
If (a big “if” at this point) efforts to replace high-soot activities with low-soot activities can gain momentum because of its potential for immediate impact on climate change, perhaps this could help bridge that gap. Large organized efforts to bring about such shifts could mean—from the entrepreneur’s perspective—a few large buyers instead of a billion scattered customers. The efforts around the $100 laptop are an example of this. That would potentially help VCs get comfortable with the scalability of some of these opportunities. In terms of most of the better solutions to soot being relatively low-tech, VCs investing in developing regions are already learning that winning investments there are often those with better execution instead of cutting-edge technology. And finally, if the benefits of lower soot levels are felt equally by those in developed AND developing economies, this could also help create additional value creation opportunities beyond just selling the equipment itself at affordable prices—something akin to carbon credits, perhaps.
None of this is to minimize the impacts of atmospheric carbon emissions, it would seem. But if soot can become a focus of those worried about near-term climate change, perhaps it could end up having some beneficial impacts on developing economies and the VCs who are investing in them.
Deals and news from the past week:
Other news and notes: Lux Research brings another gloomy perspective to forecasts about the solar market over the next couple of years… Another cleantech cluster in the making? Colorado State kicks it in gear... And finally, on that same story, what kind of “tricycle” doesn’t have three wheels, anyway?
Rob Day is a Boston-based cleantech venture capital investor and entrepreneur, and is also the President of the Renewable Energy Business Network (REBN). The views expressed on this blog are those of Rob and his friends and colleagues, not necessarily the views of REBN or Greentech Media or any other group. Contact Rob Day at: (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Comments [0]