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:
Agriculture startups are suddenly some of the hottest bets in climate tech, according to the results of our Insiders Survey.

Innovations in agriculture can seem like the neglected stepchild of the climate tech world. While food and agriculture account for about a quarter of global emissions, there’s not a lot of investment in the space — or splashy breakthroughs to make the industry seem that investible in the first place. In transportation and energy, “there is a Tesla, there is an EnPhase,” Cooper Rinzler, a partner at Breakthrough Energy Ventures, told me. “Whereas in ag tech, tell me when the last IPO that was exciting was?”
That may be changing, however. Multiple participants in Heatmap’s Insiders Survey cited ag tech companies Pivot Bio and Nitricity — both of which are pursuing alternate approaches to conventional ammonia-based fertilizers — as among the most exciting climate tech companies working today.
Studies estimate that fertilizer production and use alone account for roughly 5% of global emissions. That includes emissions from the energy-intensive Haber–Bosch process, which synthesizes ammonia by combining nitrogen from the air with hydrogen at extremely high temperatures, as well as nitrous oxide released from the soil after fertilizer is applied. N2O is about 265 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 100-year timeframe and accounts for roughly 70% of fertilizer-related emissions, as soil microbes convert excess nitrogen that crops can’t immediately absorb into nitrous oxide.
“If we don’t solve nitrous oxide, it on its own is enough of a radiative force that we can’t meet all of our goals,” Rinzler said, referring to global climate targets at large.
Enter what some consider one of the most promising agricultural innovations, perhaps since the invention of the Haber–Bosch process itself over a century ago — Pivot Bio. This startup, founded 15 years ago, engineers soil microbes to convert about 400 times more atmospheric nitrogen into ammonia than non-engineered microbe strains naturally would. “They are mini Haber–Bosch facilities, for all intents and purposes,” Pivot Bio’s CEO Chris Abbott told me, referring to the engineered microbes themselves.
The startup has now raised over $600 million in total funding and is valued at over $2 billion. And after toiling in the ag tech trenches for a decade and a half, this will be the first full year the company’s biological fertilizers — which are applied to either the soil or seed itself — will undercut the price of traditional fertilizers.
“Farmers pay 20% to 25% less for nitrogen from our product than they do for synthetic nitrogen,” Abbott told me. “Prices [for traditional fertilizers] are going up again this spring, like they did last year. So that gap is actually widening, not shrinking.”
Peer reviewed studies also show that Pivot’s treatments boost yields for corn — its flagship crop — while preliminary data indicates that the same is true forcotton, which Pivot expanded into last year. The company also makes fertilizers for wheat, sorghum, and other small grains.
Pivot is now selling these products in stores where farmers already pick up seeds and crop treatments, rather than solely through its independent network of sales representatives, making the microbes more likely to become the default option for growers. But they won’t completely replace traditional fertilizer anytime soon, as Pivot’s treatments can still meet only about 20% to 25% of a large-scale crop’s nitrogen demand, especially during the early stages of plant growth, though it’s developing products that could push that number to 50% or higher, Abbott told me.
All this could have an astronomical environmental impact if deployed successfully at scale. “From a water perspective, we use about 1/1000th the water to produce the same amount of nitrogen,” Abbott said. From an emissions perspective, replacing a ton of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer with Pivot Bio’s product prevents the equivalent of around 11 tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. Given the quantity of Pivot’s fertilizer that has been deployed since 2022, Abbott estimates that scales to approximately 1.5 million tons of cumulative avoided CO2 equivalent.
“It’s one of the very few cases that I’ve ever come across in climate tech where you have this giant existing commodity market that’s worth more than $100 billion and you’ve found a solution that offers a cheaper product that is also higher value,” Rinzler told me. BEV led the company’s Series B round back in 2018, and has participated in its two subsequent rounds as well.
Meanwhile, Nitricity — a startup spun out of Stanford University in 2018 — is also aiming to circumvent the Haber–Bosch process and replace ammonia-based and organic animal-based fertilizers such as manure with a plant-based mixture made from air, water, almond shells, and renewable energy. The company said that its proprietary process converts nitrogen and other essential nutrients derived from combusted almond shells into nitrate — the form of nitrogen that plants can absorb. It then “brews” that into an organic liquid fertilizer that Nitricity’s CEO, Nico Pinkowski, describes as looking like a “rich rooibos tea,” capable of being applied to crops through standard irrigation systems.
For confidentiality reasons, the company was unable to provide more precise technical details regarding how it sources and converts sufficient nitrogen into a usable form via only air, water, and almond shells, given that shells don’t contain much nitrogen, and turning atmospheric nitrogen into a plant-ready form typically involves the dreaded Haber–Bosch process.
But investors have bought in, and the company is currently in the midst of construction on its first commercial-scale fertilizer factory in Central California, which is expected to begin production this year. Funding for the first-of-a-kind plant came from Trellis Climate and Elemental Impact, both of which direct philanthropic capital toward early-stage, capital-intensive climate projects. The facility will operate on 100% renewable power through a utility-run program that allows customers to opt into renewable-only electricity by purchasing renewable energy certificates,
Pinkowski told me the new plant will represent a 100‑fold increase in Nitricity’s production capacity, which currently sits at 80 tons per year from its pilot plant. “In comparison to premium conventional fertilizers, we see about a 10x reduction in emissions,” Pinkowski told me, factoring in greenhouse gases from both production and on-field use. “In comparison to the most standard organic fertilizers, we see about a 5x reduction in emissions.”
The company says trial data indicates that its fertilizer allows for more efficient nitrogen uptake, thus lowering nitrous oxide emissions and allowing farmers to cut costs by simply applying less product. According to Pinkowski, Nitricity’s current prices are at parity or slightly lower than most liquid organic fertilizers on the market. And that has farmers really excited — the new plant’s entire output is already sold through 2028.
“Being able to mitigate emissions certainly helps, but it’s not what closes the deal,” he told me. “It’s kind of like the icing on the cake.”
Initially, the startup is targeting the premium organic and sustainable agriculture market, setting it apart from Pivot Bio’s focus on large commodity staple crops. “You saw with the electrification of vehicles, there was a high value beachhead product, which was a sports car,” Pinkowski told me. “In the ag space, that opportunity is organics.”
But while big-name backers have lined up behind Pivot and Nitricity, the broader ag tech sector hasn’t been as fortunate in its friends, with funding and successful scale-up slowing for many companies working in areas such as automation, indoor farming, agricultural methane mitigation, and lab-grown meat.
Everyone’s got their theories for why this could be, with Lara Pierpoint of Trellis telling me that part of the issue is “the way the federal government is structured around this work.” The Department of Agriculture allocates relatively few resources to technological innovation compared to the Department of Energy, which in turn does little to support agricultural work outside of its energy-specific mandate. That ends up meaning that, as Pierpoint put it, ”this set of activities sort of falls through the cracks” of the government funding options, leaving agricultural communities and companies alike struggling to find federal programs and grant opportunities.
“There’s also a mismatch between farmers and the culture of farming and agriculture in the United States, and just even geographically where the innovation ecosystems are,” Emily Lewis O’Brien, a principal at Trellis who led the team’s investment in Nitricity, told me of the social and regional divides between entrepreneurs, tech investors and rural growers. “Bridging that gap has been a little bit tricky.”
Still, investors remain optimistic that one big win will help kick the money machines into motion, and with Pivot Bio and Nitricity, there are finally some real contenders poised to transform the sector. “We’re going to wake up one day and someone’s going to go, holy shit, that was fast,” Abbott told me. “And it’s like, well you should have been here for the decade of hard work before. It’s always fast at the end.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
This is an edition of Heatmap Daily, an evening review of the day’s news written by our executive editor. Sign up for it here.
El Niño is here.
The world’s largest ocean slipped into the weather pattern in the spring, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the sea surface is now significantly warmer than average in one important region. When you chart ocean temperatures on a map, the “El Niño tongue” (yes, that is what scientists call it) clearly appears:

It might be more accurate to describe El Niño as something that happens to the planet, though. The Pacific occupies about one-third of Earth’s surface. When that third becomes unusually warm, it transforms weather around the world, driving wetter conditions in California, Central America, and South America; and drier weather in Asia, Africa, and Australia.
So far, so normal. El Niño is a standard fluctuation in the Earth’s climate system; we experienced the last one in 2023 and 2024.
But that is roughly where what’s normal about this year’s El Niño ends.
For one, this El Niño is far more intense than we should expect at this time of year. In an El Niño, the Pacific’s average temperature usually rises through the end of December or so; the phenomenon’s original name in Spanish, El niño de Navidad, alluded to the surprising arrival of warm currents in South America around Christmas. In the modern satellite era, the warmest El Niño ever measured happened in 2015, and ocean temperatures peaked at 3.1 degrees Celsius in November and December of that year. We called that a “Super El Niño” for just how abnormal it was.
Yet the Pacific is already more than 2.6 degrees Celsius (or nearly 5 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal — making this the third strongest El Niño ever measured in the satellite era — and it is only August. We still have four months to go, and this El Niño is already a record-smasher. More ominously, models expect that this El Niño could eventually grow to more than 4 degrees Celsius, or 7 degrees Fahrenheit, above normal.
What will that mean for the world? According to a recent Science study, the average El Niño can cost the global economy more than $3 trillion. The world is richer now than it was a decade or two ago, which should make it better able to withstand disaster. But this El Niño is so far out of sample that it’s hard to know what it could do.
And perhaps more importantly — as the climate scientist Zeke Hausfather, the guest of our new episode of Shift Key says today — it will offer a kind of preview of what the planet’s normal climate will resemble a decade from now. This El Niño is likely to push 2027’s average temperature above 1.5 degrees Celsius, the nominal threshold at which countries hoped to limit warming as part of the Paris Agreement (although, as you’ll hear, it is slightly more complicated than that).
Which is all to say: I encourage you to listen to our new episode, which is available on Apple, Spotify, or RSS. (A transcript is also available for Heatmap subscribers.) We tackle questions including:
There’s one thought that I didn’t include in the episode, however. Since late 2023, political discussion of climate change has decreased. This isn’t a phenomenon limited to any one faction of the Democratic Party — the progressives Abdul El-Sayed and Zohran Mamdani have downplayed climate policy roughly as much as, say, moderates like Mary Peltola and James Talarico have — but it is a clear trend. The American media’s coverage of climate change has declined during the same period. This “climate hushing” is not because politicians stopped caring per se, I think, but because nobody is sure how to talk about the issue in a politically useful way anymore, especially after the “climate = jobs” rhetoric that underpinned the Biden administration’s policy failed to retain voters in 2024.
I don’t believe (and think that political science has disproven) that extreme weather can “awaken” the public to climate change. Even against a gradually warming baseline, the weather — and public attention — shift far too often for that. But media coverage is loosely responsive to events. When the super El Niño of 2015 and 2016 smashed the then-record for the hottest year ever measured, it helped initiate a new era of public and elite concern about climate change. That El Niño’s heat waves, wildfires, and mass coral bleaching previewed the far worse disasters of the decade that followed. This El Niño’s disasters and broken temperature records could be worse — and even less ignorable.
On copper prices, nuclear’s jellyfish woes, and Leo DiCaprio’s Chilean NIMBYism
Current conditions: The death toll from Colombia’s earthquake has risen beyond 250 • A severe thunderstorm flipped a car in Columbus, Ohio, as a large system swept across the Midwest • A partial solar eclipse is set to occur the Northeast.

David Crowley, a moderate Democrat and local official in Milwaukee, narrowly defeated Francesca Hong, a leftist state lawmaker and former ramen chef, in the Democratic gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin last night. The race marked one of the most significant tests of Democratic voters’ willingness to elect a member of the ascendant Democratic Socialists of America, now the most popular socialist group in U.S. history. Her campaign promised to make childcare and school lunches free, repeal anti-union laws, and give renters more protections against eviction. She also pitched what she called her “control-alt-delete” plan to eliminate tax credits for data centers and put a statewide moratorium on permits for new artificial intelligence facilities.
Ahead of Tuesday’s primary, the AI developers Vantage, Oracle, and OpenAI announced a $60,000 community investment in Port Washington, which my colleague Jael Holzman described as “the most controversial data center development area in the state.”
Just last week, the Trump administration agreed to pay the energy giant RWE more than $1.2 billion to abandon an offshore wind project, the latest in a series of deals in which taxpayers hand over billions to not receive new sources of clean electricity they badly need. On Tuesday, Senators Alex Padilla, the California Democrat, and Angus King, the independent from Maine, introduced a bill that would give companies that reject Trump’s payouts an expedited route to more development. “The Trump Administration is doing everything it can to kill California’s offshore wind future, handing energy companies billions of taxpayer dollars to walk away from projects that would have powered millions of homes,” Padilla said in a press release. “This bill makes sure their destructive approach doesn’t waste what’s already been invested so we can get these leases back to work, create the jobs Trump killed, and keep energy bills low for working families instead of letting his war on renewables cost Californians even more.”
The bill has one potential flaw, other than the fact that Republicans are unlikely to pass it and President Donald Trump is even less likely to sign it. That, as my colleague Robinson Meyer wrote this week, is that the roughly $4 billion in payouts so far went to projects that were “already dead or dying.” The money spent, in other words, is “for nothing.”
Please read the following two sentences in the tone of the famous scene of Tony Soprano defending Christopher Columbus: In this newsletter, Ea-nāṣir, the Mesopotamian copper merchant from Bronze Age-era Ur whose stone-carved complaints about a subpar metal shipment remain readable millennia later, is a hero. End of story! Why, you might ask? Because we are once again living through an age where copper, the basic building block of all things electric, is in high demand. Copper soared back to within half a cent of its record high Tuesday of nearly $14,000 per metric ton after an outage at a major smelter in Indonesia rattled global prices, Mining.com reported.
The fight over North America’s only major cobalt refinery, meanwhile, is heating up. The mining giant Glencore made a bid for control of Sherritt International, which has taken a beating from U.S. sanctions due to its 50% stake in Moa, a joint venture with the Cuban government. The joint venture’s assets include the Canadian refinery and Moa nickel-cobalt mine in Cuba. The Glencore-backed consortium is up against Gillon Capital, the family office of Ray Washburne, a Republican fundraiser and former Trump official, according to the Financial Times.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Weeks after Europe’s latest heat wave forced inland nuclear stations to pare down output for lack of cooling water in the continent’s rivers, a “massive influx” of jellyfish has forced France’s EDF to shut down three units at its Gravelines nuclear station and cut power from a fourth. That’s taken at least 3.2 gigawatts of capacity offline, Bloomberg reported, right as temperatures are expected to surpass 104 degrees Fahrenheit in the coming days. The unusually hot temperatures off France’s shores have encouraged jellyfish populations to “bloom,” clogging the pumping stations through which coastal nuclear plants like Gravelines pull in cooling water.
In Egypt, meanwhile, construction crews working on the country’s first nuclear station hit a critical milestone. The containment vessel for the Russian-designed El Dabaa plant’s first unit is nearly completed, according to World Nuclear News.
Digging deep enough into the bedrock around New York City to tap into lava-hot rocks for electricity production is probably still years away, despite the progress that next-generation geothermal companies such as Fervo Energy have recently made. But thermal networks that maintain a steady environment year-round by circulating air at a constant temperature are increasingly popular ways for New Yorkers in private homes outside the city to stay warm in winter and cool in summer. Now the city itself is seeing whether a large-scale version could work for the subway system and municipal buildings. A study is set to begin soon into whether a thermal energy network could be built along subway routes to capture, store, and redirect excess heat that accumulates in the Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall and Chambers Street station complex to municipal buildings above ground. “Radiant cooling technology will absorb heat from the subway platforms and transfer it to geothermal boreholes drilled beneath Chambers Street,” reporter Carlo Cariaga wrote for Think Geo Energy. “This excess heat will then be stored underground until it can be used for supply to nearby municipal buildings during winter.” The contract for the feasibility study is due to be awarded in the fall, with work scheduled to start in early 2027.
“It seems like it’s a good place to test geothermal solutions because it sounds like there is a part of the tracks that isn’t being used, so they don’t have to stop service,” Jack Klein, the citizen researcher who conducted his own gonzo Subway heat study last year, told my colleague Jeva Lange this week.
Leonardo DiCaprio has long been a major donor to environmental causes. But rarely has the actor taken as clear a stance against green development if it comes at any ecological cost as this. On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported that the Oscar winner had told his nearly 60 million Instagram followers that fewer than 1,000 Pehuenche spiny-chest frogs remain in the wild, and that construction of the proposed Chile-Argentina transmission line threatens the amphibians’ habitat. “Conservationists are not asking for the transmission project to be stopped,” the celebrity wrote in the post over the weekend. “They are asking for it to be built where it does not put a Critically Endangered species at even greater risk.”
Rob checks in on this season’s supercharged ocean temperatures with climate researcher Zeke Hausfather.
Every few years, the Pacific Ocean’s surface waters become especially warm near the equator, a climatic phenomenon known as El Niño.
El Niño is a normal part of the climate system, but even in a normal year, it can trigger extreme weather around the world. Forecasters are worried that the current El Niño — which just began a few weeks ago — is going to be anything but normal. Models suggest that we could soon see the hottest El Niño ever measured, with unpredictable and catastrophic effects for ecosystems and societies around the world.
What does that mean? And why does this El Niño look so bad? On this episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Zeke Hausfather, a climate research lead at Stripe and a research scientist at Berkeley Earth. They discuss what forecast models are saying about this El Niño, why it gives us a glance at the future, and whether climate change itself is accelerating.
Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.
Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.
Here is an excerpt from their conversation:
Robinson Meyer: How much, at this point, are we in an El Niño that is record-breaking? Like, how much do we see in observations, physical observations of the ocean or the atmosphere and the rest of the climate system, and how much do we think from the models that it is going to get even hotter?
Zeke Hausfather: So the way that we track the strength of an El Niño — there’s a few different ways to track it. But the most common one is from this particular region of the tropical Pacific called the Niño 3.4 region, which is sort of like about a third of the way into the Pacific off the coast of Chile, right around the equator. And that’s where this tongue of warm water forms during El Niño events. That’s sort of the characteristic signal of El Niños. And temperatures in that region, as of today, are at 2.8 degrees centigrade above normal, normal meaning the average of the last 30 years. So it’s sort of a sliding window that tries to remove some of the human-caused warming.
Robinson Meyer: Are we comparing temperatures from that region to another region? Or they’re just in that region two or more degrees above normal?
Zeke Hausfather: So it’s a good question. The traditional way that El Niño has been defined is to just compare that region to itself, but with a 30-year moving average applied to remove the effects of human-caused warming. There is another metric that was introduced by NOAA last year called the Relative El Niño Index, which is a variant where you sort of subtract out the average over the tropical ocean as a whole from that region, so you’re looking at the difference between that region and the rest of the tropics.
There’s pros and cons of that approach. Arguably, it removes the human warming signal a bit better, but it also can overly penalize really strong El Niño events that reach outside of that region because they start warming the whole tropics. So anyway, the details are technical, but the point on the observations is that we’re already seeing a very strong event occurring there today. You know, temperatures as of today, when we’re recording, August 10, are 2.8C above normal. To put that in perspective, the strongest ever anomalies we’ve recorded, at least daily in the satellite record since the 1980 or so, were in 2015, 2016, and those were about 3.1 degrees above normal. And so as of today, by itself, it would be the third strongest El Niño signal ever recorded in that region.
But what’s different is that El Niño almost always peaks near the end of the year. So if you look at all the El Niño events on record, there’s been one or two that have peaked in October, but the vast majority peak in November or December, and a couple as late as January. It’s a very persistent pattern of these events. And so the fact that it’s only the beginning of August now and we’re already at this extremely high level, we’re essentially running two to three months ahead of any other El Niño on record in terms of how quickly it’s developing, which is one of the reasons why we’re increasingly convinced that this is going to be a record-setting event. It’s going to blow any event we’ve seen previously out of the water. And if you look at the latest models that came out this morning, actually, it’s good timing. They’re predicting a peak of around 4C in the Niño 3.4 region, which will be, you know, more than a degree above the previous record and could end up being the strongest El Niño in 500 or 1,000 years. We don’t have great proxy estimates going back, but, it certainly is something well outside of anything we’ve seen since records began in 1850.
Robinson Meyer: The swimmer Katie Ledecky swims a race sometimes in the Olympics and she’ll be out swimming and then behind her there’s a computer-generated line which is the current world record, and she’s way out in front of the current world record, and you’re watching her and then she does she turns around in the pool and then the world record is behind her. That is the current El Niño. This is the Katie Ledecky-style El Niño.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
NOAA’s El Niño page and the relative El Niño index
An Assessment of Earth's Climate Sensitivity Using Multiple Lines of Evidence, the 2020 paper where Zeke was a coauthor
Zeke’s blog post on AI emissions: The real energy use of agentic AI
John Bistline’s post on AI emissions at Watershed
Heatmap’s coverage of AI emissions: A New Guesstimate for Corporate AI Emissions
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Discover the Yale Clean and Equitable Energy Development online certificate program at the Yale Center for Business and the Environment. In this fully online, 5-month program, you’ll learn from leading experts, develop practical skills, and grow a powerful network. Visit cbey.yale.edu to learn more and apply.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.