123Fab #101

1 topic, 2 key figures, 3 startups to draw inspiration from

Catalysts are substances that increase the rate of a chemical reaction without being consumed in the process. They are the unsung heroes of the industrial world and have become indispensable in a wide range of industries: chemical, pharmaceutical, petrochemical, automotive, etc. One of the best-known applications is the catalytic converter in motor vehicles, which transforms toxic gases into less harmful pollutants.

Today, they play an important role in decarbonization, with a wide range of applications, including the following:

• Production of renewable fuels: Catalysts enable the conversion of renewable raw materials, such as vegetable oils or organic waste, into sustainable fuels such as biodiesel or bioethanol.
• Green hydrogen: Catalysts are at the heart of green hydrogen production through water electrolysis. Until today, the most applied catalysts in the production of green hydrogen are noble metals such as platinum and iridium, but research is in process to find cheaper and more sustainable alternatives
• Biomass conversion: Biomass can be valorized into useful chemicals and fuels via catalysts, hence reducing further the dependance on fossil feedstock and lowering the carbon footprint of the chemical industry.
• Plastic recycling: Catalysts play an important role in chemical plastic recycling. They offer a way for the depolymerization of the polymer into its basic monomers, which can then be reused to manufacture new plastics. A good example is the enzymatic process for the recycling of PET developed by the French company Carbios.
• CO₂ conversion and utilization: Advanced catalytic processes are being developed to convert CO₂ into valuable products like fuels, polymers, and chemicals. These innovative reactions could turn carbon emissions into a raw material, and then close the carbon use loop.

However, while catalysts provide considerable environmental benefits in use, many have resource-intensive and polluting manufacturing processes. As an example, mining and processing precious metals, widely used in catalytic converters, like platinum or palladium, are often associated with ecological damage, including habitat destruction and water contamination. It is therefore crucial to find and develop new, more sustainable alternatives.

Emergence of new catalysts with lower environmental impact

To meet sustainability requirements, companies in the chemical industry are actively seeking catalytic solutions with lower environmental impact. For instance, BASF has established a Catalysts Innovations Platform dedicated to identifying more sustainable catalysts. In this context, various approaches and types of catalysts are emerging, each offering specific advantages to help achieve the industry’s sustainability goals:

• Biocatalysts, sometimes referred to as “nature’s catalysts “or enzymes are intrinsically sustainable. Their use allows to produce organic molecules in a milder manner compared to traditional chemical methods. For instance, Novozymes offers biocatalysts for biofuel production. Additionally, Solvay utilizes biocatalysts in the manufacturing of some of its polymers.
• Nanocatalysts offer several benefits compared to their traditional counterparts: the nanometric dimension offers a much better structure-performance ratio, which increases their catalytic activity and selectivity, and reduces energy consumption and the cost of chemical processes. Gen-Hy is a start-up developing catalysts based on nickel nanoparticles.
• Catalysts with abundant metals: Research is moving towards the use of more abundant and less expensive metals, such as iron, to replace precious metals like platinum. Gen-Hy, for instance, develops high-performance catalysts based on nickel nanoparticles, an abundant and inexpensive metal, to replace platinum and iridium in certain applications.
• Photocatalysts are catalysts that accelerate chemical reactions by absorbing light. This technique can be applied in interesting ways in the context of energy transition, particularly for the chemical trapping of CO₂. Researchers from the Institut lumière matière in Lyon and the Institut des sciences chimiques de Rennes are working on molybdenum aggregates, an abundant and inexpensive metal, as an alternative to noble metal-based photocatalysts.
• Ecocatalysts are quite new in sustainable chemistry. They are derived from plants that have naturally accumulated metals present in their environment during the phytoremediation process. Bioinspir has developed, for instance, ecocatalysts derived from plants for the responsible synthesis of cosmetic and perfumery ingredients.

2 Key Figures

6%

The chemical sector is responsible for approximately 6% of global CO2-equivalent emissions

$22.30 billion

The global industrial catalyst market size was nearly $22.30 billion in 2023

3 startups to draw inspiration from

Gen-Hy

A French start-up specializing in green hydrogen production has developed high-performance catalysts free of noble metals. Using an innovative formulation based on nickel nanoparticles—an abundant and affordable metal—it offers a new path toward more sustainable and cost-effective hydrogen production.

Entalpic

Founded in 2024, Entalpic is a French startup at the forefront of generative AI technology for the chemical industry. The company’s advanced AI platform designs catalysts to optimize chemical processes in areas like energy storage, fertilizer production, and pollution control, blending open and proprietary research.

Cascade Biocatalysts

Denver-based startup Cascade, specializing in enzyme-based processes, uses its Body Armor for Enzymes™ technology to drive greener, cost-effective chemical reactions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Its projects encompass diverse areas, including CO₂ capture, fragrance production, and wastewater treatment, highlighting the broad commercial potential of biocatalysts.

Please fill out our contact form so that we can get back to you very quickly with our product offer.

Context 

Our client has developed a strong innovation activity to fuel its transformation. In this context, our client asked us to explore market demand for a new offering in dismantling and extracting valuable components from lithium-ion batteries.

Mission

We carried out a study to define the go-to-market strategy:

• Map of the second-life battery value chain, from manufacturing to end-of-life
• Segmentation of second-life component buyers
• Real-world applications of second-life components
• Interviews with 8 potential customers on interest and technical needs
• List of existing technical standards for selling second-life battery cells
• Review of the EU battery regulation compliance
• Recommendations on the go-to-market strategy and prioritization of potential customers to address first

Key figures

123Fab #100

1 topic, 2 key figures, 3 startups to draw inspiration from

In today’s rapidly evolving agricultural landscape, regenerative agriculture has emerged as a transformative approach to address the pressing challenges of climate change, soil degradation, and biodiversity loss. This innovative methodology, first introduced in 1983 by Robert Rodale, offers concrete solutions to restore ecosystems and ensure the long-term viability of farming.

What is Regenerative Agriculture?

Regenerative agriculture is a holistic approach designed to regenerate critical resources such as soil, water, air, and biodiversity while boosting farmers’ incomes. By using regenerative farming methods, farmers can restore the natural balance of their ecosystems, leading to healthier soil, lower CO₂ emissions and increased resilience against extreme weather events like droughts and floods.

Key solutions in Regenerative Agriculture

Soil Regeneration

Soil health is the foundation of regenerative agriculture. While traditional methods like crop rotation, cover cropping, and reduced tillage remain effective, innovative techniques are emerging to further improve soil fertility:

• Precision agriculture: data-driven tools optimize farming practices. For instance, Assolia enables farmers to fine-tune crop rotations and soil management based on real-time insights into soil conditions.
• Biochar application: this form of charcoal produced by heating organic material in a low-oxygen environment, enhances soil quality, improves water retention and contributes to carbon sequestration. Companies such as NetZero and Poas Bioenergy manufacture it.
• Microbial solutions: biostimulants and biofertilizers from companies such as Veragow and Mycophyto offer natural alternatives to synthetic fertilizers, promoting soil fertility and plant health.

Water Regeneration

Water is a precious resource, yet is often taken for granted. Regenerative agriculture emphasizes the importance of efficient water use and regeneration through:

• Optimized irrigation: ensures crops receive the exact amount of water needed, reducing waste. For example, Unilever has implemented this in its Spanish tomato supply chain using soil moisture sensors, weather stations and data analytics software production to provide accurate data on water requirements.
• Water recycling: involves collecting, treating, and reusing water on the farm, through techniques such as simple filtration, artificial wetlands (which naturally filter and treat wastewater), and reverse osmosis, an advanced filtration method that removes contaminants for safe reuse

Air Quality

Regenerative agricultural practices offer a dual benefit: they significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions—addressing the 20% of global emissions attributed to conventional agriculture (see our blogpost for a detailed breakdown of emissions by sector here)—while simultaneously enhancing the soil’s capacity to sequester carbon.

• Reduced use of chemical inputs: by minimizing reliance on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, farmers can lower their greenhouse gas emissions.
• Reduced use of heavy machinery: regenerative practices also limit the need for heavy machinery, resulting in lower fuel consumption and reduced emissions. This not only decreases greenhouse gas output but also lowers operational costs and machinery wear.
• Carbon sequestration: techniques like no-till farming and agroforestry—planting trees and shrubs alongside crops—enhance the soil’s capacity to store carbon, effectively removing CO₂ from the atmosphere.

Farmers can also generate additional income by selling carbon credits, for the additional carbon stored in their soil, through platforms like Klim or Soil Capital, which support them in their transition to regenerative practices.

Biodiversity Enhancement

• Biodiversity monitoring: companies such as Nature Metrics utilize eDNA technology to detect individual species from small samples of soil, sediment, water, or air. This approach enables accurate monitoring of changes in both above-ground and below-ground biodiversity, including soil bacteria and fungi.
• Pest management: biological pest control, often referred to as biocontrol, is a method of managing pests using natural predators, parasitoids, or pathogens. French startup Agriodor uses natural scents emitted by plants to repel crop-destroying insects.

How can the transition to regenerative agriculture be accelerated?

The shift to regenerative agriculture can’t be left to farmers alone. Initial costs and associated risks require collaboration between farmers, governments, and the private sector. Policymakers play a crucial role by rethinking existing farming policies, providing financial incentives and offering technical support.

The private sector also has a vested interest in financing the transition to regenerative practices, as it improves their carbon footprint and enhances supply chain resilience. Many companies are already making commitments; for instance, Nestlé, the world’s largest food and beverage company, aims to source 50% of its key ingredients through regenerative agriculture by 2030.

2 Key Figures

40%

of the world’s soils are moderately to highly degraded due to conventional agriculture

$2.2 billion

the amount Danone, Pepsico, Nestlé and Cargill commited to investing in regenerative agriculture at COP28

3 startups to draw inspiration from

Klim

Headquartered in Berlin, Klim enables farmers to transition to regenerative agriculture at scale by providing financial support, knowledge, documentation tools, and a community via their digital companion for farmers. Klim-verified carbon removal credits, generated by Klim farmers, help companies offset their carbon emissions locally with maximum impact and transparency.

Veragrow

A French company that offers organic fertilizers made from vermicompost, i.e. earthworm droppings containing nutrients and micro-organisms beneficial to plants. An ecological alternative to pesticides that also revitalizes the soil.

Agrovar

A Bulgarian company which has developed a software specialized in precision agriculture, offering advanced tools for informed decision-making, as well as real-time crop monitoring and management. Its soil health assessment algorithms analyze essential soil data, contributing to climate resilience by helping farmers adapt to changing weather conditions.

Please fill out our contact form so that we can get back to you very quickly with our product offer.

At Aster Fab, we are the architects of the climate industrial revolution, partnering with emission-intensive industries to transform them into the engines of a sustainable future.

Defining the Decarbonization Battlegrounds

Carbon-Intensive: Sectors that generate high levels of CO₂ emissions, typically from the use of fossil fuels in their production processes. These sectors are a major contributor to climate change and a key focus of decarbonization efforts.

Emission-Intensive: Sectors that generate high levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including not just carbon dioxide (CO₂) but also other potent gases like methane (CH₄) and nitrous oxide (N₂O). This extends beyond carbon-intensive, as sectors like agriculture can also be emission-intensive due to methane emissions from livestock and nitrous oxide emissions from fertilized fields.

Energy-Intensive: Sectors that consume large amounts of energy, regardless of the source of that energy. This can include both carbon-intensive and low-carbon energy sources. Reducing energy consumption through efficiency improvements is an important strategy, but these sectors must also transition to low-carbon energy sources, such as renewable electricity, hydrogen, or biofuels, to achieve deep decarbonization.

Hard-to-Abate: Sectors where achieving deep emissions reductions is particularly challenging due to technical limitations or a lack of viable alternatives. This typically includes carbon-intensive and energy-intensive industries like steel, cement, chemicals, aviation, and shipping, where alternatives to fossil fuels are limited or costly.

Quantifiying the Emissions Challenge

Figure 1 – Global Emissions by Sector

According to data from Rhodium Group’s 2021 net GHG emissions report:

• Industry accounts for 29% of global emissions, driven by industrial processes and the use of fossil fuels as feedstocks and energy sources. Manufacturing processes such as cement production, steel manufacturing, and chemical production emit substantial amounts of CO2 due to high-temperature processes and chemical reactions. Cement production alone accounts for around 5% of global CO2 emissions, making it one of the most carbon-intensive industrial processes. Decarbonizing manufacturing processes entails an important need for energy efficiency through industrial electrification (electrifying process heat and high-temperature processes), adopting low-carbon fuels, low-carbon feedstocks and energy sources (hydrogen, biofuels, bio-based feedstocks) as well as developing CCUS.

• Electricity generation is also responsible for 29% of emissions, primarily due to the heavy reliance on coal and natural gas for power generation. This sector encompasses various activities, including power generation and use. Countries heavily reliant on coal, such as China, the United States, and India, face a significant challenge in balancing energy demands with environmental imperatives. Coal combustion alone contributes a significant portion of CO2 emissions, with coal-fired power plants being major contributors. The aim is to transition away from coal-fired generation and fossil fuels by increasing the adoption of renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. To do so we must enhance the flexibility and interconnectivity of the grid.

• Agriculture represents 20% of global emissions, largely from methane emissions produced by livestock and nitrous oxide emissions from crop fertilization. Moreover, the use of synthetic fertilizers in agriculture leads to the release of nitrous oxide emissions, a potent greenhouse gaz. Sustainable agricultural practices, such as precision farming, agroforestry, and improved livestock management, offer opportunities to mitigate emissions and enhance resilience to climate change.

• Transport accounts for 15% of emissions, primarily due to the use of fossil fuels in road, aviation, and maritime transport. In addition to CO2 emissions, transportation also produces other greenhouse gases such as nitrous oxide and methane, contributing largely to climate change. Electric vehicles offer a promising solution to reducing emissions from the transportation sector, with estimates suggesting they could reduce CO2 emissions by up to 50% compared to internal combustion engine vehicles. However, challenges such as the need for widespread charging infrastructure, range anxiety, and consumer behavior pose significant barriers to their widespread adoption. Furthermore, the aviation and maritime sectors present large challenges, making the top priority to develop low-carbon alternatives for long-distance travel and freight transportation. We need to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles and to develop viable low-carbon alternatives by investing in R&D for SAF, green hydrogen, ammonia and methanol.

• Buildings account for 7% of total emissions, mainly from energy use for heating, cooling, and appliances, as well as emissions from construction materials. Moreover, as urbanization accelerates and populations grow, the demand for new buildings and infrastructure rises, placing further pressure on this industry to reduce its environmental impact. Sustainable building practices, such as energy-efficient design, use of renewable materials, and adoption of green building standards, offer pathways to mitigate emissions from the building sector. However, challenges such as retrofitting existing buildings and addressing the lifecycle emissions of construction materials remain key areas for improvement in the industry’s efforts to combat climate change

The Most Polluting Industries are the Hardest to Decarbonize

The most polluting industries are often the hardest to decarbonize due to inherent process emissions from chemical reactions, high-temperature heat requirements above 1000°C that are difficult to electrify, long-lived capital assets with recent investments locking in emissions for decades, or being trade-exposed commodities where transitioning alone could make them uncompetitive globally. Overcoming these barriers will require technological breakthroughs, supportive policies, and demand shifts to create viable pathways for deep emissions cuts in sectors like steel, cement, chemicals, and other energy-intensive industrial processes.

Unlocking Solutions Through Collaboration

The emission-intensive industries highlighted in this article represent some of the toughest challenges in the quest for sustainability. Unlocking solutions will require a concerted, collaborative effort from governments, industries, investors, and society. Innovative technologies, disruptive business models, and shared purpose will be essential in navigating this labyrinth. As we tackle the toughest emitters, we can expect to see the emergence of a new sustainable infrastructure, read more here.

In the vast landscape of innovation lies a pivotal point where groundbreaking concepts collide with the formidable challenge of commercialization. This nexus, often termed the “first-of-a-kind (FOAK) puzzle,” presents a unique set of hurdles, especially in industries dedicated to combatting climate change. This article delves into the complexities of navigating this puzzle, with a specific focus on climate technology and the capital expenditure (CAPEX) demands it entails.

Defining FOAK

Figure 1 – The financing structure of a FOAK

FOAK projects are those pioneering endeavors that herald the debut of a new technology, business model, or production process at a commercial scale. These ventures hold immense promise for advancing climate change solutions while offering substantial opportunities for exponential growth if successful. However, the novelty and capital intensity of FOAK projects erect significant barriers, creating what is often referred to as the “first-of-a-kind valley of death.”

Indeed, the journey from prototype to full-scale commercial deployment involves traversing various stages, including lab pilots, pilot plants, and commercial-scale demonstrations. At each phase, startups encounter escalating capital requirements, coupled with escalating risks.

The Chicken and Egg Problem

Innovative projects, particularly those considered “First-of-a-Kind” (FOAK), face a significant funding challenge known as the “chicken and egg problem.” This conundrum arises from the reluctance of traditional funding sources such as venture capital (VC), private equity (PE)/infrastructure finance, and debt lenders to invest in FOAK initiatives. The inherent risk and capital-intensive nature of such projects make them unappealing to these investors, who prefer more established ventures with proven track records. Consequently, there exists a pronounced funding gap, especially during the mid-stage of development, where FOAK projects require substantial financial support to progress.

Furthermore, even corporations, which might be proactive in entering offtake agreements with FOAK projects, encounter their own set of challenges. They often lack sufficient risk-bearing capital and are burdened by slow decision-making processes.

While public grants could potentially fill this funding void, they typically come with limitations. These grants are often too small in scale or contingent upon securing additional funding from other sources mentioned above. This creates a circular dependency, exacerbating the chicken and egg situation – FOAK projects need funding to progress, yet traditional investors are hesitant to invest without proof of viability, perpetuating a cycle of financial uncertainty and stagnation.

Solving the Equation

From the founders’ perspective, ensuring successful project and infrastructure financing requires a comprehensive understanding of investor needs. This entails familiarity with various financing methods, including grants, debt, and equity. Such expertise can be cultivated through the guidance of a proficient CFO or by seeking advice from external advisors. Moreover, establishing technical proof-points is paramount. This necessitates demonstrating the technology’s viability with a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6 or 7, often achieved through the operation of fully functional demo plants or through strategic partnerships. Finally, granular planning and meticulous documentation are essential for satisfying project financiers and debt providers. This involves providing comprehensive details of the business model, market projections, patents, regulatory approvals, contracts, and contingency plans.

From a financial players’ perspective, it is imperative to involve more engineers in the investment evaluation process, particularly for technologies that have yet to attain full commercial scale. This ensures a thorough assessment of the technical potential of solutions and helps in making informed investment decisions. Furthermore, fostering strong multi-stakeholder alliances among founders, venture capitalists (VCs), private equity (PE) firms, infrastructure investors, corporates, banks, foundations, government entities, and universities is essential. These alliances facilitate risk mitigation and expedite the development of First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) plants.

 Figure 2 – Illustration of FOAK deals

In summary, tackling the FOAK puzzle offers both significant hurdles and unique chances for progress, especially in fighting climate change. Startups can overcome these challenges by adopting a comprehensive financing strategy, tapping into various funding sources, and forming strategic alliances. In essence, solving the FOAK puzzle requires not only financial ingenuity but also strategic foresight, collaboration, and perseverance—a journey essential for realizing the transformative potential of climate technology and capex-intensive ventures.

Examining recent economic history reveals a nuanced narrative surrounding the trajectory of Cleantech, characterized by periods of growth, setback, and adaptation.

From 2006 to 2011, the emergence of Cleantech 1.0 marked a notable surge in investment efforts aimed at addressing environmental concerns. Cleantech, an umbrella term encompassing various innovations in the energy industry, such as renewable energy and resource efficiency, garnered significant attention and resources during this phase. However, the initial enthusiasm was later tempered by what is colloquially termed the Cleantech Bubble.

During the Cleantech 1.0 era, prominent ventures such as Solyndra (solar panel manufacturing) and KiOR (biofuels production) symbolized the aspirations and subsequent challenges of the movement. These companies, supported by substantial investments, initially highlighted promising solutions for energy-related issues. Nevertheless, their eventual downturn, marked by Solyndra’s bankruptcy filing in 2015 and KiOR’s similar fate in 2014, underscored the complexities and uncertainties inherent in Cleantech ventures.

Figure 1 – The burst in the Cleantech bubble

The decline of Cleantech 1.0 stemmed from a combination of factors, including the emergence of fracking, which introduced cheaper alternatives to renewable energy sources, and the reduction of government funding for clean energy initiatives. Additionally, heightened global competition, particularly from countries like China, posed challenges for sectors such as solar panel manufacturing. The venture capital model, though instrumental in the initial stages, revealed its limitations in supporting the prolonged and unpredictable development cycles of clean energy technologies, often leaving startups stranded in what is commonly referred to as the “valley of death” due to lack of “patient capital.” Post-mortem analyses, such as those conducted by the MIT Energy Initiative, advocated for a collaborative approach involving diverse stakeholders, ranging from corporations to hedge funds to affluent individuals. Indeed, Successful Cleantech 1.0 companies like SunRun instead utilized other forms of financing like debt.

However, the setbacks experienced during Cleantech 1.0 prompted a reevaluation and the birth of Climate Tech 2.0—a more expansive and inclusive approach to addressing climate change. Unlike its predecessor, Climate Tech transcends energy solutions to encompass innovations across multiple industries such as consumer goods, agriculture, manufacturing, and transportation (see our blogpost on the definition of Climate Tech here).

Zooming out, it becomes clear that investing in climate solutions demands an abundance of patient capital and a clear path to exit. The difficulties faced by Cleantech 1.0 companies in securing late-stage equity financing and viable exit strategies underscored the need for a more resilient financial ecosystem. Fortunately, the landscape has evolved, with initiatives like SPACs and dedicated growth capital funds offering new avenues for climate-focused startups.

Additionally, corporate entities are stepping up to assume leadership roles in driving climate innovation forward. Company ArcelorMittal invested $36M in January 2023 in Boston Metal which develops electrochemical units to replace blast furnaces in steel manufacturing. Similarly, HeidelbergCement has partnered with Solidia Technologies, a company specializing in sustainable cement and concrete solutions. This shift signifies a deeper understanding of the interconnected nature of environmental challenges and the necessity for comprehensive, cross-sectoral solutions.

Nevertheless, a notable challenge persists: the funding dilemma known as “FOAK” or “First of a Kind” financing. Climate Tech, with its focus on pioneering solutions across various sectors, often grapples with securing funding for projects deemed too novel or risky by traditional investment standards. FOAK projects, while holding immense potential for transformative impact, face reluctance from investors wary of the uncertainties inherent in untested technologies or business models. For more insights, check out our blogpost Solving the FOAK Equation—CAPEX & Climate Tech here.

In summary, the transition from the Cleantech 1.0 bubble to the Climate Tech era marks a pivotal shift in addressing environmental challenges. While Cleantech 1.0 faced setbacks, it played a crucial role in driving down the prices of solar and wind energy, making them more accessible and essential for advancing climate technology. These advancements laid the foundation for Climate Tech 2.0, which expands the approach beyond energy, signaling a promising future of innovation and cooperation. Challenges like funding for novel projects remain, but with continued dedication, Climate Tech offers a pathway to a sustainable future.

The discourse surrounding Climate Tech, an umbrella term encapsulating solutions aimed at mitigating or adapting to climate change, has gained traction in recent years. Yet, defining this concept remains a nuanced endeavor, with various interpretations and frameworks proposed by different entities. Some interpretations of Climate Tech are narrow, focusing solely on renewable energy solutions such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. In contrast, others adopt a broader perspective, encompassing a spectrum of innovations across sectors like agriculture, transportation, construction, and waste management.

Defining Climate Tech

Aster Fab refers to Climate Tech as encompassing any product, service or technology designed to address at least one of the six core objectives outlined in the European Union’s (EU) Taxonomy Regulation.

It’s important to note its distinction from cleantech, which predominantly focuses on energy-related elements. For further elucidation, delve into our blog post “From the Cleantech 1.0 Bubble to the Climate Tech Era” for deeper insights here.

The Six Objectives

Figure 1 – The definition of Climate Tech according to Aster Fab

Here are the six pillars outlined by the EU Taxonomy, providing a structured framework for understanding Climate Tech and its criteria.

1. Contribution to climate change mitigation: This pillar focuses on activities that significantly contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions or increasing carbon sequestration compared to the baseline for that activity. Climate Tech startup examples include: Ekwateur (Renewable Energy, France), Northvolt (Batteries, Sweden), Heliogen (Concentrated Solar Power), SkyCool (Radiative Cooling, United States)

2. Contribution to climate change adaptation: Here, the emphasis is on activities that enhance resilience to climate change impacts, such as improving infrastructure to withstand extreme weather events or implementing water management strategies to address changing precipitation patterns. Climate Tech startup examples include: Terrafuse (Flood Risk Modeling, United States), Urban Canopée (Heat Island Mitigation, France)

3. Sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources: Activities that promote sustainable water management, including water conservation, pollution reduction, and protection of marine ecosystems, all of which contribute to climate resilience and adaptation. Climate Tech startup examples include Bioceanor (Water Quality Monitoring, France), H2Ok Innovations (Water Optimization, United States)

4. Contribution to the transition to a circular economy: This pillar highlights activities that promote resource efficiency and waste reduction, thereby reducing the environmental footprint and contributing to climate change mitigation efforts. Climate Tech startup examples include AMP Robotics (Waste Sorting, United States), Ecovative (Mycelium Packaging, United States)

5. Pollution prevention and control: Activities falling under this pillar aim to prevent or minimize pollution of air, water, and soil, thereby reducing adverse environmental impacts and supporting climate resilience. Climate Tech startup examples include Blue Ocean Robotics (Ocean Clean Up, Denmark), Carbon Cure (Sequestered CO2 in Concrete, Canada), Graviky Labs (New Ink for Packaging, India).

6. Protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems: This pillar underscores activities that safeguard biodiversity, restore degraded ecosystems, and enhance natural carbon sinks, such as forests and wetlands, thereby contributing to climate mitigation and adaptation. Examples: FlashForest (Wildlife Conservation), NatureMetrics (Biodiversity Monitoring, UK), Spoor (Birdlife Data for Wind Farms, Norway).

In conclusion, we advocate for a thorough framework that assesses the sustainability and climate impact of technological innovations. At Aster Fab, our primary mission revolves around supporting hard-to-abate industries in tapping into the potential of climate technology (see our 9 industries of focus here). So, if you are seeking to engage with Climate Tech startups or exploring ways to decarbonize your operations, feel free to reach out to Léonard Stéger lsteger@aster.com.