Lessons from climate product case studies

Last week I caught up with some of our climatetech founders and the Wavemaker Impact team in Singapore. It reminded me how much Europe could learn from the pace, creativity, hunger and grit of emerging markets when it comes to building climate solutions. In South Asia, you don’t have the luxury of slow progress or “pilot purgatory.” Climate impacts hit hard and fast, so the innovation mindset is lean, practical and deeply connected to livelihoods. 1. The Green Discount Forget moonshots and massive R&D budgets. Across South Asia, founders are building cleaner and cheaper solutions that work now: modular, low-capex climatetech with real unit economics from day one, like turning waste into biofuel (Octayne) or agricultural residues into biochar (WasteX) while improving customer margins. ✅ Lesson for Europe: Move beyond the “green premium.” We don’t always need new tech; we need to deploy what already works, faster and at scale. 2. Decentralised Energy and Leapfrogging Like Africa skipped landlines to go mobile, South Asia is leapfrogging traditional grids with off-grid solar, microgrids and batteries replacing diesel, from Agros to Helios Solar Company Limited and SOLshare. ✅ Lesson for Europe: Distributed renewable energy isn’t just cleaner; it’s more resilient. Energy security in wartime or flood season may depend on it. 3. Nature-Based and Community-Led Solutions After decades of deforestation and degraded land, pioneering models are fighting back through community reforestation, mangrove restoration and regenerative agriculture. Ventures like Bumi Baru and Fair Ventures Social Forestry make nature profitable by working with local populations. ✅ Lesson for Europe: Climate action sticks when people have skin in the game. Build with communities, not just for them. 4. The Just Green Transition In emerging markets, climate isn’t a distant moral issue; it’s a development and equity issue. Policy conversations link emissions to jobs, food and public health. When clean tech creates livelihoods, people back the transition. ✅ Lesson for Europe: Embed justice, inclusion and affordability at the heart of the transition, not as an afterthought. 5. Adaptation and Resilience South Asia is among the most vulnerable regions to climate change and has no choice but to adapt: flood defences, early-warning systems, better weather data and climate-resilient crops. Ventures like Rize and Intensel Limited prove that resilience and profitability can coexist. ✅ Lesson for Europe: Don’t just decarbonise, adapt. Resilience is also an investment class. After more than two decades building start-ups across Asia, I’ve seen how constraint breeds creativity and urgency drives focus. Europe has the capital, talent and technology. Maybe it also needs a bit more of that emerging-market scrappiness and hunger. Because the truth is, we don’t need to reinvent the wheel. We just need to roll it faster. 🌍💚

After two years of engaging deeply with the subject, I'm thrilled to finally publish a study that I hope will make tourism businesses pause and re-evaluate their response to climate change! "Future-Proofing Tourism" - published as a collaboration among Regenerative Travel, Aurora Collective and Climate Conscious Travel - offers actionable insights and strategies on climate adaptation and community resilience for travel businesses, as well as key recommendations for DMOs and policymakers. 👉 It’s abundantly clear by now that the tourism sector is highly vulnerable to climate impacts. This year again, we've seen extreme weather events like floods, cyclones, droughts and heatwaves, and erratic weather patterns, disrupt tourism across the globe. 👉 As natural, cultural and community assets get impacted, tourism destinations become less appealing to travellers. Businesses need to understand the climate risks facing them, and build resilience in their supply chains, itineraries, assets and target markets. This is not just about survival, but also about unlocking new opportunities. 👉 Local communities are essential as guardians of their living culture and natural resources. They’ve contributed the least to planet-warming emissions, yet are the most vulnerable to climate impacts. A climate justice approach can enable businesses to truly centre local communities through more equitable and less extractive tourism models. 👉 Against this background, we analysed 30 case studies of tourism businesses adapting to the impacts of a warming planet. These span 6 destinations (Maldives, Kerala, Peruvian Andes, Swiss Alps, Bangkok and Amsterdam) across coastal, mountainous and urban terrains. 👉 The paper offers a climate adaptation framework and key strategies for tourism businesses of all shapes and sizes - including tour operators, hotels and community-run initiatives. These strategies will enable businesses to secure their revenue models through resilient tourism products, targeted communication approaches, and close partnerships with local communities and the wider industry. Download the report here —> https://lnkd.in/dZg6atV3 I’m deeply grateful to my co-author O'Shannon Burns for helping me turn my academic research into a valuable resource for the industry, and to Amanda Ho and her team for anchoring this white paper. My whole-hearted gratitude also to my research advisors Michaela Thompson and Richard Wetzler, as well as my fellow DCE capstonians at Harvard University for supporting this journey. And to everyone who generously shared their valuable insights and resources for this research. #climateadaptation #climatechangeandtourism #sustainabletourism #tourismadaptation #tourismwhitepaper #tourismresearch #climateresilienceintourism

🌊 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗙𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝗥𝘂𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗧𝗶𝗱𝗲: 𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗟𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗮 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗮𝗹 𝗣𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿 🌊 𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗗𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗹𝘀: - 𝗙𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀: Marty Odlin (CEO) and a team of 12. - 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗲: 2017 - 𝗘𝗻𝗱 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗲: June 2024, due to financial challenges and low demand for carbon credits. - 𝗙𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴: Raised $54 million, including a notable Series B from Lowercarbon Capital in early 2022. - 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀: Major backers included Lowercarbon Capital, Microsoft, and Shopify. The recent shutdown of Running Tide underscores the challenges of carbon removal startups. Founded in 2017, it aimed to leverage ocean power for carbon sequestration, claiming over 25,000 tons of CO2 removed in 2023. Yet, despite strong partnerships, they faced insurmountable hurdles. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗥𝘂𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗧𝗶𝗱𝗲’𝘀 𝗷𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆: 1. 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝗗𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀: A lack of demand for carbon credits was pivotal in Running Tide's fall. Startups must work to develop a stronger market for carbon solutions. 2. 𝗦𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗙𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀 𝗖𝗿𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹: Initial funding isn’t enough. Consistent financial backing aligned with growth is key for survival. 3. 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆: Confusion around ocean biomass sinking raised concerns, highlighting the need for clear, trusted methodologies to attract investors. 4. 𝗟𝗼𝗻𝗴-𝗧𝗲𝗿𝗺 𝗩𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗙𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀: Startups must build resilient business models to weather market shifts and regulatory changes. 5. 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀: Innovations must meet economic realities. Founders need to be ready for operational challenges as they scale. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 Running Tide’s journey cautions and inspires climate tech innovators. Let’s collaborate to foster a supportive ecosystem that champions carbon removal solutions. What are your thoughts on the future of carbon removal technologies? How can we better support startups in this vital sector? Let’s discuss #ClimateTech #Sustainability #CarbonRemoval #LessonsLearned #Innovation

What can we learn from the failures of asset-heavy startups when building Climate Tech and Deep Tech at scale? 🌱 The recent wave of collapses in agriculture and food startups provides sobering insights. Critically, it wasn’t the technology that failed — lab results and production worked fine in more than 100 companies that recently shut down. So what went wrong? Looking at the patterns highlighted in the "Autopsy of the Agrifood–Climate Tech Collapse" by Eugen Kaprov (link in comments), several concrete lessons emerge for climate tech and deep tech founders: 1️⃣ Don’t giga-scale before costs are under control. Focus relentlessly on the cost-down curve. 💰 In asset-heavy startups, unit economics are king. Founders must prove contribution margins early and drive costs down aggressively before expanding. Scale alone cannot fix economics – it only amplifies losses if costs remain too high. Every incremental unit should move the business closer to self-sufficiency rather than deeper dependence on external capital. Key takeaway: Don’t aim for a Giga-Factory; build a staircase – and cut costs on each step. 2️⃣ Expand modularly and tie growth to guaranteed demand. 🏗️ A common failure was building large facilities or multiple sites before demand was verified. Modular, incremental production units allow startups to expand only when off-take agreements or contracted revenue justify it. This approach limits upfront capital exposure, reduces operational complexity, and makes each expansion financially sustainable. Key takeaway: Only build what your contracts justify – let demand pull scale, not narrative. 3️⃣ Move beyond VC as early as possible 💳🤝 Long-cycle, capital-intensive hardware startups benefit from strategic equity from corporates or industrial customers. These investors provide patient capital, market access, and alignment with long-term operational goals – anchoring the business to real demand. On top of that, founders can layer debt instruments, asset leasing, asset-based loans, and sometimes working capital for modular deployment without diluting equity. Public guarantees can further de-risk debt, unlocking lower-cost capital that would otherwise be unavailable. Key takeaway: Bring in customers as strategic investors once you have a product. Use debt instruments and guarantees to further reduce VC exposure. Scale should never be the strategy in itself. It is the outcome of aligning unit economics, production strategy, and capital structure. #ScaleupFinance #ClimateTech #DeepTech #Gigafactory Lea Saurin Sascha Steffen Helmut Schoenenberger Florian Egli Julia Reinaud Ann Mettler Jon Fuller Dorothea Ringe Max Vellguth Dr. Heba Aguib Kelsey Emms Paula Schmid Schmidsfelden Jules Besnainou Victor van Hoorn Magnus Agerström Sarah Mackintosh Magdalena Jabłońska Kädi Ristkok Stefan B. Wintels Jörg Goschin Dr. Dominik Steinkuehler Miki Yokoyama Yair Reem Tim Woodcock Wim Reyntiens

Their almond supplier faces 30% water cuts next season. Their risk assessment said: not material. (a due diligence story in 3 acts) I was assessing a food brand's climate risks for an investor. The brand had done the homework, or so it thought. A big consultancy had prepared its sustainability assessment. - Polished.  - Confident. - Professional. The conclusion? Water wasn't material. One small detail: a key ingredient was almonds from southern Spain. A water-intensive crop, grown in a region facing severe allocation cuts. 📌 Act 1: The gap I started where I always start - at sourcing regions. - Their assessment used generic industry benchmarks. - Nobody had mapped where ingredients actually came from. - Nobody had cross-referenced suppliers with climate projections. "Spanish almonds" was a line item.  It didn't show as a drought risk. 📌 Act 2: The conversation I flagged the water exposure in my assessment. The investor asked the brand directly: "Walk us through your water risk." Brand: "Our consultants said it wasn't material." Investor: "Your almond supplier is in a region with forecasted 30% allocation cuts. How is that not material?" Silence. 📌 Act 3: The lesson The deal didn't fall apart. But confidence took a hit. The brand had paid for an assessment that missed what a 10-minute sourcing conversation would have caught. Because generic templates don't ask "where do your almonds grow?" What I've learned from doing these assessments: Climate risk lives in the specifics. - Which seasons, not which years - Which regions, not which countries - Which suppliers, not which categories Before your next investor conversation, ask your team: → Do we know the climate risks in our top 5 sourcing regions? → Has anyone mapped our suppliers to water stress data? → Would our answers survive a 10-minute follow-up? Investors are starting to ask these questions. Better to discover the gaps yourself first. P.S. What's ONE climate risk you discovered hiding in your supply chain?

I always think of Patagonia as the sustainable product success story. How do they actually overcome the "Say-Do Gap"? The "Say-Do Gap" in sustainable consumption is a structural failure of product-market fit. Bain & Company data (report in comments) reveals a stark misalignment: while consumers are willing to pay a 12% premium for environmental impact, sustainable goods often command a 28% markup. This 16% chasm is where eco-startups lose their trajectory, pricing themselves into a luxury niche before proving foundational utility. Patagonia wins because it masters Cost-Per-Wear (CPW). A $300 technical shell isn't a subsidy for recycled polyester; it is a performance guarantee. On an exposed ridgeline in the Colorado Rockies, "sustainable" is a distant second to "reliable." If a garment fails in high-altitude wind, its carbon footprint is irrelevant to the user experience. To achieve systemic adoption, Climate PMs must pivot: 1. Prioritize Performance over Sacrifice: Sustainability must be the byproduct of superior products. If the "green" version requires a compromise in durability, you haven't found product-market fit. 2. Leverage Circularity for Value: Repairability is a financial lever that lowers the long-term cost of ownership, eventually allowing premium products to undercut "disposable" competitors. Patagonia masters this and generated $13M/year in revenue from their resale platform, Worn Wear, in 2025. The demand-side transition will not be won by asking consumers to pay more for less. It will be won by leaders who build better products that happen to be sustainable. At what point in a product’s lifecycle does "sustainability" transition from a cost center to a competitive moat for your organization? #ClimateTech #ProductMarketFit #CircularEconomy #SustainableLiving #UnitEconomics

The newest episode of "The Green Blueprint" is out. I loved this conversation between Lara Pierpoint and Douglas Chan. It offers a candid look at the challenges and opportunities of scaling direct-air capture. As the industry moves from demonstration to commercial deployment, a few key insights from Climeworks stand out: Strategic site selection: The intersection of clean power and storage geology proves critical for DAC economics. Iceland's case study demonstrates how access to carbon-free energy and suitable storage formations can dramatically impact project viability. Manufacturing & design evolution: The industry is learning valuable lessons about modularity and mass production. The progression from custom-built units to standardized, repeatable designs highlights a crucial shift toward manufacturability -- a key factor for cost reduction and scale-up potential. Project Finance: DAC projects are pioneering new financing approaches by: - Securing offtake contracts during construction - Blending public funding with private capital - Testing various project finance structures as facilities reach commercial scale Market reality check: Challenges center on demand creation. While voluntary markets provide early momentum, the industry recognizes that compliance markets and policy support will likely be crucial for achieving gigaton scale. This suggests the need for parallel tracks of market development. Scaling considerations: The path from thousands to millions of tons of annual capacity raises important questions: - How to optimize between plant size and geographic distribution - The role of modular design in risk management - Balance between standardization and site-specific optimization I couldn't recommend this podcast more! It's such a helpful breakdown of how companies are navigating the path to commercialization for a wide range of climate technologies. Subscribe!

Many climate startups pitch carbon credits first. This CEO does the opposite. Carbon is the side effect. The real business is sustainable lumber. I recently had Doug Willmore from World Tree speak to my Climate Tech Startups and Investors class at Duke University. His story is a good reminder of how nature-based ventures actually scale. Here’s the short version. World Tree is commercializing Paulownia, a fast-growing hardwood tree that hasn’t been sold at scale yet for lumber (not just biomass-to-power). It can be used for furniture, window blinds, veneers, finished wood, musical instruments, and surfboards. Some surprising facts about World Tree: • 8,000 acres planted so far • $300M of lumber currently growing in the ground • Goal of 140,000 acres in the next few years • Grows 10-20 feet per year • Reaches maturity in 8-12 years • Absorbs up to 15 tons of carbon per acre every year • Nitrogen-rich leaves fertilize the soil And the business model is not what most people expect. Instead of buying land, they partner with small farmers. Farmers grow the trees. World Tree buys the finished lumber. Which means farmers can earn far more than traditional row crops while helping restore soil and biodiversity. A few insights that stuck with the class: 1. Carbon-only projects often fail If the project only works because of carbon credits… it probably won’t survive. Real climate businesses need multiple revenue streams. 2. Supply chain risks create opportunities Climate change, fires, and pests are disrupting global timber supply. That’s opening the door for alternative hardwood species. 3. IP matters even in agriculture Their planting protocols and growth systems are proprietary. Even if a competitor started today, it would take many years just to reach the first harvest. 4. Nature-based markets are still the Wild West Biodiversity credits, carbon credits, ecosystem services. Standards are still emerging, prices vary wildly, and buyers all want different things. Great opportunity… and real risk. -- The big takeaway for founders: Build a real business first. Let climate benefits be the multiplier, not the only revenue line. Trees that make money tend to get planted. Trees that rely on goodwill tend to stay in PowerPoint. Nature is powerful. But markets still matter. 🌎