You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
A new fundraise from Isometric, plus more of this week’s — and last week’s! — big money moves.

With the Juneteenth holiday last Friday we missed out on our weekly roundup of energy and climate tech funding news. That means this week brings a double dose of announcements, covering three deals from this week and two from last.
As my colleagues Alexander C. Kaufman and Robinson Meyer both reported last week, the coalition of carbon removal buyers known as Frontier announced a new $915 million funding commitment, notably now counting artificial intelligence giant Anthropic among its members. That set the stage for a related development this week: Isometric, the carbon removal market’s largest certification platform, also announced fresh funding as it looks to expand the scope of its certification methodology to cover things like low-carbon materials and renewable energy certificates.
In a sign of continued momentum across the electric and autonomous vehicle industries, this week also brought a tranche of debt financing for charging infrastructure, alongside a large European utility deal for iron-air battery startup Ore Energy. And rounding out last week’s activity, Foundation Alloy raised a Series A to scale lower-energy metals production, while yet another SpaceX alum secured funding for a new startup, this time to mass manufacture geothermal turbines, aiming to reduce deployment timelines and costs.
Eamon Jubbawy founded the UK-based certification platform Isometric in 2022 with the goal of creating a carbon credit standard to end all carbon credit standards. The voluntary carbon market was — and largely still is — a confusing patchwork of registries, protocols, and verification bodies offering myriad ways for companies to offset their emissions, with the price and quality of offsets varying dramatically. Isometric set out to make sense of it all by hiring a team of scientists to evaluate the efficacy of different carbon removal pathways, ultimately developing a rigorous set of standards that carbon crediting companies must meet to earn Isometric certification.
Now, having become the world’s largest carbon removal certification company by contracted volume, the startup is taking its model beyond this beachhead market. This week, Isometric raised a $40 million Series A led by global venture capital firm AVP to expand into the broader industrial economy. That includes verifying everything from the embodied emissions of low-carbon steel and cement to superpollutant reductions, renewable energy certificates that attest to the generation of clean power at a specific time and place, and the climate impact of low-carbon fuels used in shipping and aviation.
“Isometric was basically founded to say, look, the long-term solution here is obviously government and regulation, but in the meantime, this is too important to let the market just keep doing it like this,” Lukas May, Isometric’s chief commercial officer, told me when I interviewed him in September 2024. He was referring to the voluntary carbon removal market — and the need for federal regulators to eventually determine what does and doesn’t qualify as carbon removal — but the same argument could easily apply to the new sectors where Isometric is now applying its meticulous approach.
The startup’s team of scientists is also getting a major boost from AI. Isometric says its “agentic certification platform” can do in mere hours what used to take months, with agents ingesting millions of data points underpinning claims around things like carbon reduction or clean energy generation and cross-checking them against first-hand sources such as sensor readings, satellite imagery, and supply chain records. That allows the company’s scientists to focus on investigating meaningful discrepancies rather than manually spot-checking datasets at random.
Terawatt Infrastructure was little more than a year out of stealth in 2022 when it rocked the electric vehicle charging industry by raising a colossal $1 billion Series A to expand its full-service platform. The company offers more than just charging infrastructure — it also owns the underlying real estate, power management software, operations, and, in some cases, even the energy assets themselves.
Now the company founded by Google’s former head of energy strategy Neha Palmer has secured up to $300 million in debt financing, backed by a group of global banks led by RBC Capital Markets, to further expand its network. The deal indicates that these large financial institutions now view this type of full-stack charging infrastructure as a secure, bankable asset as EV and autonomous vehicle fleets proliferate. Goldman Sachs projects that the latter will become a $415 billion global market by 2035, representing an expansion from about 7,000 robotaxis in 2025 to 6 million in 2035.
Terawatt already counts Waymo and PepsiCo among its customers, and, according to Bloomberg, operates more than 50 properties in around a dozen states, with over 200 megawatts of power capacity in development. While this latest debt financing will help it expand its network, it’s still just a drop in the bucket in terms of what’s needed: BloombergNEF estimates that building out the global charging infrastructure for electric and autonomous fleets will require more than $635 billion in investment through 2040.
Back in February, I covered the news that Ore Energy, a European iron-air battery startup and Form Energy competitor, had completed a grid-connected pilot in France with EDF, the state-owned electric utility. The project helped validate the startup’s core technology: a 100-hour battery that can discharge continuously for four days under real-world operating conditions. This week, the startup built on that progress by announcing a deal with Dutch utility Budget Thuis for a 1-gigawatt-hour iron-air battery system, with the first phase — a 400-megawatt-hour installation — slated for delivery in 2028.
This agreement marks the first iron-air offtake deal with a European energy supplier, an impressive milestone considering Ore has raised just shy of $30 million, compared to Form’s roughly $1.2 billion. The partnership with Budget Thuis is designed to help shield customers from volatile gas prices while stabilizing the Dutch grid as it becomes increasingly reliant on wind power. Like many battery storage technologies, Ore’s system dispatches clean, low-cost electricity when power is scarce, dirty, or expensive. But unlike conventional lithium-ion technologies, Ore’s is designed for those multi-day lulls in renewables generation — a challenge that’s particularly acute when it comes to wind energy.
According to Latitude Media, Ore aims to scale to providing 50 gigawatt-hours per year by 2030, suggesting this announcement could be the first of many to come. "We’ve shown our iron-air chemistry works in a European utility setting, and this deployment is the next step in commercialisation: meaningful volume, tied to a real project, with an energy supplier that understands what multi-day storage means for its business,” Aytaç Yilmaz, co-founder and CEO of Ore Energy said in the company’s press release. “We believe iron-air will become as important for wind as lithium-ion has been for solar.”
Metals production is typically an extremely energy-intensive process, involving melting a base metal at hundreds or even thousands of degrees Celsius before mixing in additional elements to create an alloy. The metals startup Foundation Alloy thinks it has a way to simplify this process, however, while significantly lowering energy demand. Rather than melting metals — a process that traditionally relies on fossil fuels to generate enough heat — the startup mechanically bonds metal powders together in a solid state process. This takes substantially less heat and no melting, though the mechanical grinding and fusing carries an energy cost of its own. The final product is an alloy with a more granular, uniform internal structure from the outset, thus eliminating the need for many secondary processing steps.
The startup raised a $22 million Series A last week, led by the climate-focused VC Voyager Ventures, to scale beyond the lab and into commercial production in both the U.S. and Asia. It’s building a 36,000-square-foot factory in Massachusetts, as well as a smaller facility in New Hampshire, with plans to double headcount across its production, engineering, and commercial teams to meet growing demand for alloys in the defense, manufacturing and energy sectors. “Our new Massachusetts facility and modular production cell are set to grow capacity from pilot-scale today to tons per week by 2027 — a 100x increase, built on a modular equipment platform that deploys and scales 10x faster than traditional metals manufacturing,” Jake Guglin, Foundation Alloy’s CEO, said in the company’s press release.
Today, the startup primarily produces molybdenum-based alloys used in high-temperature industrial applications such as hot forging and die casting, and is expanding into iron-based alloys such as stainless steel. Exactly how much energy its production process saves remains unclear, as the company has not disclosed any quantitative energy or emissions reduction figures for the full lifecycle of its products, although it says that the processing chain for its metals is fully electrified.
As my colleagues Matthew Zeitlin and Emily Pontecorvo reported a few weeks ago, the multiverse of former Elon Musk employees who have gone on to start fascinating, often out-there sounding clean tech companies is vast and varied. Last week brought funding news on yet another: turbine manufacturing startup Critical Energy. Founded by former SpaceX rocket propulsion engineer Spencer Jackson, the company raised $19 million in seed funding alongside $3 million in venture debt to build modular turbines designed for geothermal power plants and waste heat applications.
The premise is that while geothermal drilling has become dramatically faster and more efficient in recent years, turbine manufacturing has failed to keep pace. Today’s geothermal turbines are typically bespoke and assembled almost entirely onsite. But Critical Energy’s thesis is that shifting most of the manufacturing and construction process into factories can shrink turbine deployment timelines from years to weeks while substantially reducing costs. It designs its modular turbines to fit inside shipping containers, allowing them to be shipped via truck and assembled onsite. The startup’s first two products are 2.5-megawatt and 5-megawatt turbines, which can stack together to accommodate larger projects as opposed to building one large, custom turbine.
According to TechCrunch, this new funding will go towards Critical Energy’s first 2.5-megawatt project, which is slated for a power plant in a yet-to-be-named location expected to come online in 2027. Longer term, The company aims to be manufacturing gigawatts of turbines by the early 2030s, ultimately enabling over 300 gigawatts of new power generation annually by 2045. But its bet on factory manufacturing will only prove to be a scaleable, cost effective strategy if demand for geothermal power continues to grow at a rapid clip, leveling off at a scale that can justify this type of high-volume production.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
What are the health risks? How can I protect myself? And will my plants be okay?
If you live anywhere near the Great Lakes or Mid-Atlantic (or certain parts of the Mountain West), odds are it’s smoky where you live. Wildfires raging in western Ontario are sending smoke cascading south and east across the U.S., prompting widespread air quality alerts affecting millions of Americans.
The good and — very bad — news is that we’ve been here before. Here’s a look back at some of Heatmap’s coverage from the summer of 2023, when smoke produced by forest fires in Quebec blanketed 128 million people in a murky haze and turned the New York City skyline an ominous shade of orange.
One day — even just one hour — of smoke inhalation can exacerbate pre-existing health conditions and increase an individual’s chance of premature death by 12%. To stay safe, Jeva Lange recommends avoiding prolonged outdoor exposure and masking up when you go outside.
Wildfire smoke is full of tiny pollutants that can leak into your apartment even when the windows and doors are sealed tight. That’s where air purifiers come in, Matthew Zeitlin writes.
Tinted skies are now a rare, remarkable event. But decades ago, before targeted policy interventions, this was everyday life for New Yorkers. Here’s Jeva with more on the legacy of the Clean Air Act.
Before you step out for a run, read Emily Pontecorvo’s guide to what the Air Quality Index is and isn’t telling you.
People should not inhale smoke because of its dangerous health effects. But plants, interestingly, may actually thrive. Allow Jeva to explain.
Current conditions: Wildfire smoke tinted the skies orange across the Northeastern United States, rendering the air on New York’s Long Island thick and hazy all afternoon • London is a balmy 83 degrees Fahrenheit today, but new research shows that the number of days topping 86 degrees has quadrupled since the 1980s • Chile declared a state of emergency across 10 regions ahead of a series of major storms.
The resumption of fighting between the United States and Iran over the Strait of Hormuz could hammer energy markets harder than the previous phase of the conflict, as the crude stockpiles governments tapped at a record volumes to avert the worst economic impact of the war are now depleted. That’s the warning oil traders issued to the Financial Times on Wednesday. “We’ve burned through all of the buffers we had. Everything,” one trader said. “All of that’s now gone.” The gloomy assessment came as The Wall Street Journal reported that President Donald Trump has weighed expanding the U.S. military operation in Iran.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration, meanwhile, released its short-term energy outlook for July, in which the agency estimated that global crude oil inventories declined by 5.1 million barrels per day throughout the second quarter of this year, marking a decline above the seasonal average for that period over the past five years. Even before the conflict picked up again, my colleague Matthew Zeitlin wrote that it would be a long time before the Strait of Hormuz returned to normal operations. Don’t hold your breath.

In the steamy final weeks of August 2019, I found myself on Puerto Rico’s southeast shores. Set against the backdrop of the island’s central mountain range with streams that quench its underground aquifers, this sun-soaked coastal plain was coveted by Spanish and American sugar barons for centuries before transforming into a hub for U.S. agribusiness in recent decades. By the time I arrived, the aquifer was facing threats on multiple fronts. The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority — known as PRASA or AAA in its Spanish acronym — was losing, by some estimates, more than half the water in its system to leakage, forcing the state-owned utility to draw more from aquifers. With the island’s electrical system still in tatters from Hurricane Maria and its debt at crushing levels, PRASA had little capacity to make the upgrades needed to prevent further decline. Meanwhile, local environmentalists accused regulators of providing little to no oversight of how much water industrial facilities drew from their wells. The story I ultimately reported suggested that water would follow electricity as the next major infrastructure crisis. It was just being felt first, at that time, in places like the town of Salinas, where people like Manases Vega — then a 65-year-old with a chronic respiratory illness — lost access to water every two weeks due to rationing.
Now the crisis has indeed spread. Last month, I told you when Governor Jenniffer González Colón called in the National Guard to help after a major water pipeline cracked. More than a month later, El Nuevo Día reported that the ongoing shortages are forcing residents to pay up to $700 per week for water. Businesses are paying up to $3,500 per week to buy enough bottles to cook, clean, and flush toilets. Hotels are spending up to $100,000, the island’s newspaper of record also reported last week. “We were without water for more than 50 days here on Calle Loíza,” Jonathan Collazo, a restaurant owner, said, referring to the popular street with bars and restaurants in Santurce, roughly the equivalent of San Juan’s Williamsburg.
For 12 years, Péter Szijjártó served as Hungary’s top diplomat in the government of former Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. On Wednesday, he announced his resignation from parliament to take a job at China’s top electric automaker. “I have received an extremely honorable offer to fill an international position from one of the world’s leading companies,” he wrote in a post on Facebook. “BYD is one of the greatest automotive success stories of the past twenty years and is also the world’s leading manufacturer of new energy vehicles.” His critics may quibble with the word “honorable.” Szijjártó established his relationship with the company while serving as foreign minister, and his government had planned to provide subsidies to BYD to open its new hub in Budapest. Just a few months ago, CNBC reported that the European Union was investigating labor violations at BYD’s factory in Szeged. Last month, the Hungarian investigative site 444 reported that a worker died at the plant.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
The Department of Energy has granted the startup SuperCritical Materials an exclusive license to commercialize patented technology to extract uranium from seawater. The deal requires the Austin-based company to manufacture and deploy the technology in the U.S. before exporting to allied nations, according to The Northern Miner. The concept of drawing uranium out of seawater has existed for years, an idea that took root before the vast new reserves of the metal were discovered on land. But seawater extraction remained on the agenda in countries without access to mines. When I visited the Philippines in 2024 to report on the country’s nuclear ambitions, I met scientists at the state atomic energy agency who were researching methods to secure a uranium supply from the water. But Ted Garrish, the assistant U.S. secretary of nuclear energy, said “this technology represents a potentially significant contribution to America’s long-term fuel security and industrial competitiveness.”
On Tuesday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed an executive order enacting the nation’s first statewide moratorium on data centers. On Wednesday, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, a fellow Democrat, staked out a different position, unveiling what E&E News called a “package of 10 commitments to ensure companies pay the full cost of construction, operation, power, and water” from new data centers for artificial intelligence. “On my watch, Michiganders have been protected from any rate increases due to data center development and we adopted some of the strongest protections for people and communities, but we need to do more,” Whitmer said in a statement.
“It’s been exciting to see different states — and, to be blunt, to see Democratic-governed states, particularly those in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic — try to take on the data center boom. It’s good to see them test out ideas, solve problems through legislation, and harness this moment for the public good without strangling the buildout entirely,” my colleague Robinson Meyer wrote yesterday. “For too long, blue states have leaned into a particular economic model, one in which states want to attract varying forms of development but in fact succeed only in creating new suburbs, office buildings, and warehouses.”
It is, according to Bloomberg, “the plastic America loves to hate.” But a new industry group wants to save polystyrene by convincing lawmakers to stop targeting styrofoam. Formed by 17 companies that produce the material, the Polystyrene Recycling Alliance aims to forestall bans by making sure styrofoam is treated as recyclable under state packaging laws. “There’s the narrative that polystyrene is not part of the circular future,” Justin Riney, chair of the alliance and an executive at manufacturer Ineos Styrolutions, told the newswire. “We are adamant that we have the data, and we know that our products are part of the future.”
Proposed reforms to Europe’s Emissions Trading System could see the EU itself become a carbon credit customer.
The European Union is on the verge of making major changes to its carbon market, including integrating carbon removals into the scheme for the first time.
The bloc’s highest governing body, the European Commission, is expected to publish a proposal on Friday to reform the EU Emissions Trading System, or ETS, to align it with the EU’s 2040 emissions target. Under the current rules, companies cannot use carbon credits of any kind to comply with the regulations. But as 2040 grows closer, the EU plans to rely on carbon removal to offset some of the residual emissions from industries that are the most difficult to decarbonize.
Friday’s proposal will cover which types of carbon removal will be accepted, how many carbon removal credits can enter the market and when, and who will be allowed to buy them. One leading approach would have the EU government buy carbon removal directly, which would give the industry unprecedented market certainty.
“The ETS could be the single biggest driver of demand for carbon removal for the next decade,” Felix Grey, a policy manager for the carbon registry Isometric, told me.
The ETS enforces a cap on emissions that declines over time. Large emitters located in the EU must buy “allowances” for each ton of carbon they release, while the pool of available allowances shrinks apace with the emissions cap. Last year, the EU set a new target to reduce emissions 90% below 1990 levels by 2040, building off its earlier target of a 55% reduction by 2030. The upcoming proposal will address how the market should operate between 2030 and 2040 to achieve that goal.
There are many contentious questions surrounding this next phase, including how quickly the cap should decline over the decade. Another question is how many free allowances the EU should give to energy-intensive facilities such as steelmakers and fertilizer producers, which it does to prevent them from leaving Europe due to higher operating costs. Now that the EU has launched its carbon border adjustment mechanism, which taxes higher-carbon imports of these goods, free allowances may not be as necessary.
The integration of carbon removal is also controversial. At best, it could be an opportunity to improve and scale up nascent technologies that take carbon out of the atmosphere. At worst, it could enable polluters to avoid cutting their own emissions by purchasing carbon credits that don’t represent real climate benefits. Then there’s the possibility that removals will be so expensive that their integration into the ETS will have no effect at all — that is, it will be less expensive for companies to pursue emissions reductions than to buy their way out. The outcome will depend on the rules the EU Commission proposes and what its member states ultimately agree to.
Today, most carbon removal efforts are supported by research grants and voluntary carbon credit purchases from companies like Microsoft. A common mantra in the industry is that it will never reach a meaningful scale without government backing. Carbon removal startups aren’t selling a product with inherent value, they are selling a waste management solution. Unless governments require polluters to clean up their carbon waste, or else handle the job themselves as a public good, carbon removal will never take off.
Some governments have already dabbled in state-sponsored removals. Under the Biden administration, the U.S. launched a carbon removal purchase pilot prize, dedicating $35 million to buy carbon removal from a handful of promising companies. It never got past the initial award phase, however, and the Trump administration has not continued the program. A number of cities and counties across the U.S. have set up their own, much smaller purchasing programs in an effort to support the industry. Making carbon removal part of a regulatory program like the EU’s ETS could open the industry to a much bigger market.
As of today, there are a few knowns and a few unknowns about what the Commission plans to propose. For example, it’s relatively clear what methods of carbon removal the European Commission will allow into the market. Earlier this year, the EU finalized regulations for certifying three kinds of carbon removal under its official Carbon Removal and Carbon Farming scheme — direct air capture, biomass with carbon capture, and biochar projects — laying out criteria for quality as well as monitoring and reporting rules. For now, only these three project types can be considered.
Here’s the problem: Direct air capture and biomass with carbon capture are two of the most expensive project types. The average carbon removal credit from these methods costs hundreds of dollars. The average price of an allowance in the ETS, by contrast, has hovered between $70 and $90 over the past few years. Depending on how the Commission chooses to incorporate the credits into the market, it’s possible that no one will buy them.
The European Commission has said it is considering three options. The leading proposal is for the EU to create a central purchasing authority that buys removals using revenues from the ETS. For each removal credit the government acquires, it would issue an additional allowance into the market on top of the established cap. This would enable regulated facilities to emit a bit more than they could otherwise — a tradeoff that Grey argued would help them stay competitive. At the same time, it would also ensure that there’s demand for carbon removal regardless of the price.
The second option is to leave it to the market, giving emitters the option to purchase carbon removal credits as an alternative to purchasing allowances. In this version, similar to the first, the carbon removal credits would enter the market as an addition to the established amount of allowances. Whether or not anyone actually buys carbon removal will depend on how tight the allowance market is.
In the third option, emitters would be able to use carbon removal credits in lieu of allowances, but those credits would operate “below the cap,” so to speak. For every credit counted toward the ETS, regulators would reduce the number of allowances available to purchase by the same amount. It is hard to see why any company would purchase carbon removal in this version unless and until the price of a credit drops below the price of an allowance, however.
Carbon Market Watch, a nonprofit watchdog group, isn’t excited about any of these options. In a recent white paper on ETS reforms, it argued that Europe should support carbon removal separate from the ETS. “Direct integration of CDR in the ETS is either a dead end, or the start of a slippery slope,” the group warned. Carbon Market Watch also has concerns about the integrity of the EU’s carbon removal certification scheme. The group has formally challenged the methodologies for certifying biochar and biomass with carbon capture projects, arguing that they do not account for all the emissions associated with these processes, lack sustainable biomass sourcing safeguards, and in the case of biochar, are missing monitoring requirements. If ETS credits are built on faulty science, the EU could end up spending billions of dollars to little climate benefit.
The other big question about the integration is the amount of carbon removal the EU will allow into the market. Even if the bloc decides to create a central purchasing authority, its potential to help the industry scale will depend on how much it commits to buying. Grey, of Isometric, argued that staying on course for net zero by 2050 would require the EU to remove about 100 million metric tons of carbon per year by 2040.
“A strong proposal on Friday will confirm carbon removal’s integration from 2031, commit to buying removal at the scale required to meet net zero, and treat every credible method equally rather than picking winners,” he said.