You’ve reached your free article limit
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:
The imminent closure of Duke University’s herbarium sparked an outcry in the natural sciences community. But the loss to climate science could be even worse.

Kathleen Pryer did not watch March Madness this year.
That isn’t unusual in and of itself — Pryer describes herself as “not a basketball person,” though that might still raise a few eyebrows this time of year at Duke University, her place of employment. But the professor of biology has been a bit distracted lately. For the past few months, she’s been on defense, fending off a loss of her own: the pending closure of the school’s herbarium.
A herbarium (or plural, herbaria) is a collection of preserved plants, typically dried and mounted on sheets of rigid paper. The oldest existing collection in the world, the Gherardo Cibo herbarium in Rome, dates back to the mid 1500s; many U.S. collections are well over a century old. Browsing digitized herbaria online, one can easily get sucked in by their unintended whimsy; though the preserved plants are scientific specimens, traditionally collected by botanists to be used in the study of taxonomy during Western biology’s golden age of naming things, the pages remind me more of the pale, beautiful botanical illustrations in my childhood copy of Thumbelina.
Duke’s herbarium turns 103 this year and contains 825,000 specimens, making it one of the largest collections in the country. But back in mid-February, Susan Alberts, Duke’s dean of natural sciences, sent an email to Pryer, who curates the herbarium, and four other associated faculty members to inform them that “it’s in the best interests of both Duke and the herbarium to find a new home or homes for these collections.”
Though there had long been rumblings about the future of Duke’s herbarium — calls for “strategic plans,” hand-wringing about funds, worry about hiring new staff — the news came as both a shock and a slap in the face to the faculty, chief among them Pryer. “It’s some kind of little stinky plot,” she told me, adding, “I didn’t just roll over when it happened. I reached out to absolutely everybody I could think of.”
The news of Duke’s herbarium closure ricocheted through the tight-knit natural sciences community. Mason Heberling, an associate curator in the Section of Botany at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, told me it should be a “wake-up call” for other researchers. The Duke herbarium is prestigious and hardly a “languishing collection,” he explained; researchers and faculty can easily slip into taking their herbaria for granted. “I’ve realized now that a huge part of my job as a curator will need to be explaining why these collections are important,” he said.
Swiftly, botanists and curators came to Duke’s defense. Opinion pieces and quotes decrying Duke’s decision appeared in the pages of The New York Times and Science. A petition went up on Change.org urging the school to reconsider its decision. Online fora burbled with discontent. “This may be the single worst thing to ever happen to Southeastern botany,” one post on Reddit read, with 64 additional comments piling on the administration for being “profit-obsessed business assholes.” “They could probably fund the entire thing with the salary of one head [basketball] coach,” grumbled another commenter.
The criticism of Duke’s decision is rooted in both a romantic nostalgia about herbaria — the same way you might feel fondly about hand-painted globes or cabinets of curiosities — and a very modern sense of scientific urgency. Researchers have only recently started leveraging the collections as invaluable pieces of data in the greater picture of climate change. “Herbaria are, in many ways, one of our best places to understand nature across space, time, and species,” Charles Davis, the curator of vascular plants at the nation’s largest private herbaria, at Harvard University, told me. “These collections are snapshots of events and occurrences in space and time that you just can’t easily replicate anywhere else. In fact, I would argue it’s impossible.”
Think of it this way: Worldwide, there are about 3,600 herbaria located in 193 different countries that collectively hold about 400 million specimens. Botanists estimate as much as half of the planet’s undiscovered flora could be found in herbaria backlogs. Barbara Thiers, the editor of the Index Herbariorum, a digital guide to the world’s collections, told me that when she was the director of the New York Botanical Garden Herbarium, “we had a huge room filled with unidentified species; I think there were 35,000 or 40,000 specimens in there.” That wasn’t for lack of effort — Thiers said that for many of the plant groups, there simply aren’t any working experts or published literature for curators to consult.
Because the climate is changing so fast, many plants in herbaria will go extinct before they’re formally discovered and named, a process known as a “dark extinction.” “It’s a very sobering feeling to touch the leaves of a tree that doesn’t exist anymore,” Erin Zimmerman, an evolutionary biologist and author of the forthcoming book Unrooted: Botany, Motherhood, and the Fight to Save an Old Science, told me, recalling coming across such a specimen in an herbarium while doing her own research. She likened herbaria to a library, but in her description I also heard echoes of a church: “The specimens are sometimes very old; you have to be very gentle with them, which just adds to the sense of holding something precious,” she went on.
Dwindling biodiversity is only the most obvious way herbaria are critical to 21st-century science. “Phenology, whether it’s when plants flower or when birds migrate, is one of the most important signals of climate change response,” Davis, the Harvard curator, said. Still, our long-term datasets aren’t very robust; research on how plants are changing with warming climates typically dates back only 25 to 30 years, tends to concentrate on the U.S. and Western Europe, and centers on easily observable phenomena, like the leafing out of woody trees. Researchers can turn to herbaria for centuries-old records of where certain plants grew and when they flowered, helping to bridge gaps in our understanding.
Heberling, of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, tracks environmental changes in his research, but he didn’t start using herbaria until well after he’d obtained his Ph.D. Only then did he realize “herbarium specimens are incredible archives of the past,” he told me.
“You can look at the tiny pores, the stomata, on the leaves” of a plant in a herbarium and “see how that has changed over time with increased carbon dioxide,” Heberling said. Scientists have even used this method to create CO2 records.
Admittedly, climate science is still a relatively cutting-edge use case for the herbarium; according to Davis’ research, “global change biology” remains one of the least popular ways to leverage herbaria, well behind “taxonomic monographs” and “species distributions” that still dominate the field. Still, “there are things that, five to 10 years ago, I’d never even imagined we’d be doing today with herbarium specimens,” he told me.
As a result, Duke’s herbarium closure has made some question the university’s commitment to climate research — something that Alberts, the school’s natural sciences dean, emphatically refuted when I raised the question with her. She told me that a rough search revealed that only 23 of the 2,000 papers published by Duke researchers over the past few decades on climate change contained the word “herbarium” anywhere in them. “With my knowledge about all of the climate change research that’s been going on at Duke, the herbarium is not really central to whether or not Duke studies climate change,” she said.
For her part, Pryer has bristled at the administration’s insinuations that the herbarium is of limited use to students and faculty on campus. “You don’t measure a collection by who uses it,” she told me. “As I’ve been naughty enough to say, it’s not a toilet. People outside — the global community — uses it. That’s how you measure its value; things like 90 refereed publications a year [across all disciplines] cite the Duke collections.” Pryer can quickly tick off the climate projects that have come through the herbarium’s halls, including her recent supervision of a local high schooler’s research paper that found the pink lady’s slipper is flowering in the area 17 days earlier than it used to.
Duke is “not an appropriate home for a herbarium that is this large and valuable” for a number of reasons, according to Alberts, ranging from the need to hire new faculty to manage it (Pryer and several of her colleagues are approaching retirement) to the collection’s current building needing renovations. “I have had people email me saying, ‘I know you have enough money, I know you have the facilities.’ I’m like, ‘I’m sorry, you should tell me who you’re talking to, because we don’t,’” Alberts said. She added that she plans to be personally involved in finding the right home for Duke’s herbarium over the next several years.
After all, it’s not like the potential untapped climate records in the Duke collection are being destroyed (though both Pryer and Davis told me they’ve had deans wonder aloud if they could be, since many herbaria are now digitized). The goal is only to move the collection somewhere where it might be better utilized.
Thiers, though, said this is exactly what makes the natural science community so alarmed. As the collection is split up, ideally, the Index Herbariorum would record where Duke’s specimens get sent so scientists can still find them. But when new collections absorb the materials, curators will weed out duplicates, sending unneeded pages elsewhere — at which point specimens can fall between the cracks. “Before you know it, individual specimens will be lost,” Thiers said. “I can almost guarantee that as these secondary moves happen, people will not keep up with the database records.”
There is also a worst-case scenario everyone seemed nervous to mention: that Duke’s collection, in whole or in part, will end up in storage somewhere. Herbarium specimens are extremely susceptible to insect damage and must be kept in expensive, climate-controlled cabinets and rooms. “If they’re putting boxes in a storage storeroom someplace, they’ll be worthless in no time,” Thiers warned. The unidentified plants and uncollected climate data — all of it could be lost. And the cruelest part? Scientists wouldn’t even know what they are losing; it’s a dark extinction of a dark extinction.
When I spoke with Alberts, she said there were no updates on the administration’s plans for the herbarium. She expressed sympathy, though, for the faculty who oppose the administration’s decision. The herbarium “is their life’s work, and it’s important that they have a voice in this process,” she said.
Pryer is determined to keep fighting, even if this isn’t exactly how she’d pictured spending her golden years at Duke. “It’s having an impact on my research and on my health,” she told me. “It’s been pretty unrelenting. I’m anxious for something to resolve.”
She looked tired. There was a faculty meeting later in the day, and she hoped she’d be able to get more clarity about the administration’s decision then. “I don’t want this to go on forever,” she said. “But I also don’t want there to be a decision that makes Duke look insane.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
September bills in competitive Republican-held districts have risen by a median of 21% between 2024 and 2026.
New Jersey’s 7th District is an odd place for an affordability fight.
The 15th wealthiest congressional district in the country, NJ-7 stretches from the tidal strait bordering New York’s Staten Island to the winding Delaware River state line with Pennsylvania. Between those two bodies of water, roughly a third of households earn more than $200,000 a year. The 7th Congressional District is also New Jersey’s “one rare and surprising swing district,” per Gothamist, and, as a result, it is also the spendiest on elections: the 2024 high-water mark of $26.3 million in campaign spending will likely be surpassed this year by incumbent Republican Tom Kean Jr. and Democrat Rebecca Bennett.
Needless to say, there are comparatively few constituents in NJ-7 for whom paying $40 more on a September electricity bill than two years ago — or about $300 more over the past 12 months — is the difference between whether they can afford groceries or not. But like many other Republican-held competitive seats this election year, the district has seen its electricity rates increase since just before President Donald Trump took office for his second term, according to the latest data available in Heatmap and MIT’s Electricity Price Hub.
In NJ-7, residents paid about 35% more on their electricity bills this September than two years ago; bills are up more than 18% over the past 12 months compared with the year before. Over that same time period, the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter moved Kean’s reelection race from “lean Republican” to “toss-up” to where it stands now: “lean Democrat.” NJ-7 is largely served by Jersey Central Power & Light and Public Service Electric and Gas Co, and, for both, increases in basic generation service charges — that is, what utilities charge for the production and supply of electricity — drove most of the spikes in bills.
“Kean Jr. voted to roll back commonsense energy tax credits and jack up electricity bills for New Jersey families,” the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee wrote in a June memo, seizing on the opportunity. “Skyrocketing utility bills are a major issue in the Garden State, and Kean Jr. is part of the problem.” The National Republican Congressional Committee has defended Kean by pointing to his vote for the Ratepayer Protection Act (which passed the House last month only to fail in the Senate) and his record of opposing “Green New Deal policies” to “protect families from rising costs.”
The New Jersey race has more to it than electricity prices, of course; the 7th District election has drawn national attention, including involvement from Elon Musk and, at one time, President Trump. But if even a race in one of the country’s wealthiest districts has become a referendum on affordability to some extent, incumbent Republicans elsewhere are certainly feeling constituents’ ire, too. In the 42 closest races listed as “toss-up” or “leans” by the Cook Political Report, September bills in Republican-held districts have risen a median of 21% from 2024 to 2026, compared with just 13% for Democratic-held seats (and compared to 16% across all 435 House districts).
Comparing September bills is useful because it suggests how voters are perceiving utility costs as they prepare to submit their ballots. But September, being a shoulder season, can also vary in temperature in many parts of the country, meaning bills may be higher because of a late summer heat wave — or an early cold snap. Still, looking over the past 12 months, bills in competitive Republican-held districts have risen twice as fast as those in competitive Democrat-held seats (8% vs 4%). Overall, 22 of the 29 Republican-held House seats in active play this November are in places where electricity bills have risen more than 10% since Trump’s election.
Another race where affordability concerns and rising electricity bills seem to be intertwined is Pennsylvania’s 10th Congressional District, held by Republican and former House Freedom Caucus head Scott Perry. The typical September bill in PA-10 rose from about $126 to $202 in just two years, a 61% increase, according to the Electricity Price Hub. (The most recent data for the district are projections, because New York and Pennsylvania release their reports on a delay.) Among the utilities in PA-10, generation contributes the largest amount to average bills, with costs roughly doubling since 2020.
Pennsylvanians are feeling it: 57% of registered voters in PA-10 told a local pollster it is “very” or “somewhat” difficult to afford monthly utility costs, making it a bigger financial struggle than groceries, gas, rent, or health care.
Perry’s opponent, Janelle Stelson, has hammered him on affordability (including gas prices) while groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council have labeled Perry as a “rate raiser,” pointing to his coziness with the fossil fuel industry and his proud opposition to renewable energy development.
Perhaps nowhere are utility rates more central to a House race than in New York’s 17th Congressional District, where Republican incumbent Mike Lawler is in a “toss-up” race against Democrat Cait Conley. His constituents are paying about $50 more on a September electricity bill than they were before he was elected in 2024, while bills have risen more than 17%, or over $330, in the past 12 months compared with the year prior. (Across the utilities servicing NY-17 — as well as NY-19, another district where utility bills are a central talking point— the delivery portion of the bill tends to be the largest, though generation costs have also grown substantially over the past five years.)
While rising electricity bills have given Democrats an easy line of attack on vulnerable Republicans heading into the midterms, Congress admittedly doesn’t set utility rates and there are limited levers for elected officials to pull to keep them down in the short term. Heatmap’s data, rather, indicates the places where voters appear especially sensitive to rate increases and may be taking it out on their elected officials — although there are still caveats.
For example, the trends are also largely regional. Our data shows the steepest electricity increases among a cluster of seats in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Ohio — many of them Republican seats in purple areas that Democrats would have targeted with or without the ammo of higher electricity prices. In other parts of the country, competitive races in California and Arizona have actually seen falling electricity bills.
Two can play the rate increase blame game, too. In New York’s 19th Congressional District, incumbent Democrat Josh Riley is running on lowering utility bills — as is his Republican opponent. (That race isn’t considered competitive by Cook, which puts Riley as the “likely” favorite.) In Ohio’s 9th Congressional District, a toss-up race where bills were about $40 higher in September of this year than in 2024, incumbent Democrat Marcy Kaptur and her allies are on the defensive and warn that her challenger, Derek Merrin, could jack them up even more.
Bills are up everywhere on average, and when you pull back, the influence on elections appears relatively small: the median competitive district’s bills rose 11.4% compared to the median bill for a safe seat, 10.3%, in January–September 2026 versus January–September 2024. The per-kilowatt-hour price of electricity (as distinct from household bills) rose slightly less in competitive races (8.2% median) than in safe seats (9.7% median). In some places feeling the squeeze on electricity bills, bigger issues are driving the election: Carol Obando-Derstine, a former utility employee who campaigned in Pennsylvania’s 7th District on lowering power bills, ultimately lost the Democratic primary to a candidate focused more on corruption and greed.
But in other districts, it won’t matter whether representatives have little control over electricity bills or whether rising prices are a national trend. “I’m working hard to keep my lights on,” one constituent says in a House Majority PAC ad that makes the case against the Republican, Lawler, in NY-17. “My bills keep going up.”
Current conditions: A new nor’easter is washing the ocean over North Carolina’s Highway 12 right as crews complete reconstruction on the Outer Banks thoroughfare following last month’s storm • After whipping Mexico’s Pacific Coast with heavy rains, Hurricane Trudy has weakened to a Category 1 storm • Super Typhoon Champi knocked out power for more than half of Guam before barreling toward the Philippines as a potential Category 5 storm.
Last week was the worst week for the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 Index since President Donald Trump’s tariffs roiled the market in April 2025. The reason? Hotter than expected federal data on inflation fueled fears of an interest rate hike that could prove devastating to the buildout of artificial intelligence infrastructure. Investors were already worrying the physical investments would cost more than giants such as ChatGPT-maker OpenAI or Claude-creator Anthropic are set to earn. But on Monday, semiconductor makers such as Oracle, Intel, and Micron Technology rallied as the AI rout came to an end. Yet CoreWeave, the cloud-computing heavyweight that led the selloff last week, closed slightly lower. The issue, investors told CNBC, is the company’s debt load. “The market tends to get worried about companies that have refinance risk when rates are higher, and CoreWeave was a little bit of the poster child,” John Lloyd, global head of multi-sector and corporate credit at Janus Henderson, whose firm owns CoreWeave bonds due in 2031, told the broadcaster. “They need the debt markets in order to grow, in some form or fashion.” That CoreWeave came close to bouncing back at all comes down at least in part to Ark Investment Management chief Cathie Wood opting to buy about $12 million of shares in the company amid the market plunge last week, a play for which The Street notes she’s known. Notably, Oracle, which was previously dubbed the “canary in the coal mine” for concern over AI debt, closed just 1% higher before plunging in after-market trading.
Microsoft, meanwhile, pulled out a major data center deal in the United Kingdom to anchor Nscale Global Holdings’ debut facility in the country, located in Loughton on the outskirts of London. But The Wall Street Journal reported that power supply issues ultimately caused Microsoft to back out of the 50-megawatt project, highlighting how hyperscalers can throw a major data center complex into disarray even at a later stage in the development. Nscale’s upcoming $35 billion stock market debut rests, as The Information noted, on its ability to build data centers.
Amazon is backing a deal for another power plant built with X-energy’s next-generation reactors. On Monday, the high temperature gas-cooled reactor startup, in which Amazon took an equity stake two years ago, signed a joint development agreement with American Electric Power to evaluate a potential 960-megawatt project at a former coal site in Sullivan County, Indiana. In a press release, AEP CEO Bill Fehrman said Amazon’s support provided “all necessary capital protections and financial safeguards that we have said are essential for any potential nuclear project to move forward.” That’s a notable departure from the line many utilities executives share in private, which is that — absent some kind of federal cost overrun insurance — building new reactors will prove too difficult a sell to shareholders. It’s part of a string of nuclear deals for Indiana, which currently has no operating atomic power reactors in its borders. On Monday evening, AtkinsRealis, the developer behind Canada’s signature CANDU reactor technology that can run on raw uranium, announced a memorandum of understanding to build up to 6 gigawatts of the pressurized heavy water reactors in Indiana. The state and the utility Hoosier Energy are the counterparties to the agreement.
In Arkansas, meanwhile, Google unveiled a new “enhanced partnership” with utility giant Entergy to power the tech giant’s West Memphis campus. As part of the agreement, Google pledged to support solar, battery, and transmission investments in Arkansas that the companies said would deliver “at least $500 million in new savings for all customers.”
Secretary of Energy Chris Wright called out New York Governor Kathy Hochul for holding up a natural gas pipeline he said would lower heating prices for residents in the Northeast as early as winter of 2028. During an appearance Monday on the Fox Business Network, Wright touted his agency’s decision last week to award Williams Companies $42 million through the wartime Defense Production Act to speed up construction of the Constitution Pipeline. “We wanted to get this in by winter of 2027 but delays and still opposition from energy-subtraction Democrats has unfortunately slowed the effort,” Wright said. “The delay right now is the governor here in New York State. We’ve been talking with her. We hope she’ll go along with this. Maybe after the election, I think she will.” The governors of all six New England states, he said, “are all on board with it.”
In a statement to me, Hochul spokesperson Ken Lovett called the announcement “nothing more than a political ploy to divert attention from Trump’s tariffs and his reckless war in Iran that have not only failed to bring down prices as the president promised, but have dramatically driven up home energy costs and gas prices at the pump.” He added that, “while the president continues to obsess over blocking renewable energy projects in order to focus on gas, oil, and even coal, Governor Hochul is focused on driving an all-of-the-above energy strategy designed to keep the lights on and costs down for New Yorkers.”
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:

Albertans are the richest Canadians on average, thanks to the province’s oil and gas industry. They’re also — after the Quebecois, of course — among the Canadians with the strongest claim to a distinct identity from the national Anglo norm, often drawing comparisons to Texans within the U.S. Monday offered the biggest test yet of just how differently Alberta sees itself. Turns out whatever regional resentments Albertans may have against Ottawa after a decade of Liberal Party rule that frequently sought to restrict the oil and gas sector hasn’t been enough to merit secession. Voters overwhelmingly rejected a nonbinding referendum calling for a real vote on whether to split away from Canada and establish an independent Alberta. At least part of the reason may be that Prime Minister Mark Carney has put a new focus on beefing up Canada’s domestic energy industries in a bid to increase exports and make the country less reliant on an increasingly aggressive U.S. That includes building new pipelines. But a new analysis by Reuters warns that a successful infrastructure buildout won’t lead to another jobs boom in oil. Much of the growth in oil sands output, instead, “is likely to come from automation and efficiency gains rather than large-scale hiring,” the newswire reported, citing industry forecasts and nearly a dozen interviews with company officials, workers, politicians, and academics. Carney admitted as much when asked by the reporter during a visit to Alberta’s Fort McMurray this month: “I wouldn't use the term ‘boom.’ I would use ‘sustained growth.’”
Europe, meanwhile, is trying to keep its own populist blowback to rising prices contained. Right as violent protests over cost of living spread from France to Italy, the Italian government has struck a deal with the European Commission that Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni expects to slash household energy bills ahead of next year’s elections. Under the agreement, according to the Financial Times, Italy will be allowed to compensate gas-fired generators to keep wholesale electricity prices from rising above €59 per megawatt-hour, roughly $66. The European Union’s market rules require that the last and most expensive source of electricity tapped to meet demand serves as the wholesale price. But the EU’s executive chamber allowed for Italy to ease its rules after prices surged 45% higher than in nuclear-powered France and renewables-rich Spain last month.
China’s exports of solar panels fell 6.4% last month compared to the same period last year, according to Reuters. That marks the fifth straight year-on-year decline in 2026. It’s a sign that China is cracking down on its glut in solar manufacturing. But Beijing isn’t looking to lose its edge over the fastest growing electricity source in the world. Last week, Bloomberg reported that China had added 12 pieces of solar-related manufacturing equipment to its list of items restricted from export. That could make it much more difficult for U.S. manufacturers comply to stand up factories given the Trump administration’s 232 import restrictions on Chinese solar equipment, which take effect later this year. The results of the Department of Commerce’s Section 232 investigation into polysilicon, which my colleague Emily Pontecorvo and I covered here, are meant to be the Trump administration’s lifeline to solar manufacturers who lost a key incentive when federal tax credits expired, ending a bonus program for developers that use domestically-made panels.
One area where China has appeared to be gaining an edge — green hydrogen production — may still remain a competitive industry for Western manufacturers. Chinese electrolyzers, the machines needed to separate the H from H2O with electricity, cost less than half of those made outside the country, according to data from the International Energy Agency. But trade levies erase much of that advantage, ultimately reducing capital expenditures by only 8% for European projects using Chinese equipment, Hydrogen Insight reported.
Call it mine-to-battery manufacturing. As demand for batteries booked, Ivanhoe Electric had planned to differentiate itself by taking a fully integrated, farm-to-table approach, owning and operating its own copper mine, refining the metal, and ultimately turning that copper into cathodes for batteries all at its same site in Arizona. Now, however, there’s an even bigger sector demanding copper: Data centers. New data center projects are driving so much demand for copper that the company is considering selling its copper to buyers other than itself, Bloomberg reported.
The company simplifies the process of getting consistent, apples-to-apples bids.
With commercial electricity prices steadily climbing, many businesses and real estate owners are increasingly eager to generate and store their own power onsite, cutting their bills and making costs more predictable. But figuring out whether solar and storage can actually pencil out — and under what conditions — can be a nightmare. Ask a handful of developers for a quote and you might get a rooftop solar array from one, a ground-mounted solar and battery system from another, and a gas turbine from a third, each with its own size, price, and financing terms.
That leaves buyers comparing apples to oranges. And for businesses evaluating a portfolio of potential projects, the process gets even messier. “These are very local-centric systems. Different interconnection requirements, different permits, different suppliers,” Gareth Evans, CEO of the onsite energy planning and procurement startup Veckta, told me. “There are hundreds of solar developers in every state.” The hard part, he added, is “knowing what supplier to go with, how to ask them the right questions in the right language, in the right format, so that you’re getting consistent bids back that you can compare and contrast.”
That’s the tension San Diego-based Veckta has built its business around. And on Tuesday, the startup announced an oversubscribed $11 million Series A to scale its solution. Origin Ventures led the round, with participation from others including the climate-focused investor VoLo Earth Ventures, which led Veckta’s $3.3 million pre-seed round in 2022.
The company starts with a single input: a property address. Veckta’s software analyzes over 5,000 data points, including utility rates, grid emissions, outage risk, local equipment and construction costs, and available incentives to assess — in under a minute — whether an onsite energy project makes financial sense. That helps buyers define their needs, from system size and installation type to contract terms, and ensures that potential suppliers are bidding on the same requirements. The result is a set of comparable proposals, without the upfront cost of hiring a consultant or supply chain expert.
Veckta’s platform includes more than 3,000 vetted suppliers. As bids come in, the startup automatically compares them based on factors including the supplier’s track record, warranties, equipment offerings, compliance with foreign entity of concern requirements, and ability to leverage federal and local incentives. From there, Veckta makes its recommendations. “Supplier A is your best option if you want U.S.-made equipment with the longest warranty, best guarantee, and they’ve done these projects before,” Evans explained, by way of example. “Supplier B is disqualified because they’ve never done a project in your state.”
Out of the roughly 34,000 customer sites Veckta has analyzed, Evans said 37% would see positive returns today by installing solar panels, battery storage systems, or both. That translates to $3.1 billion in potential project value, concentrated largely in markets with high electricity rates such as the Northeast and California, and among businesses facing steep peak-demand charges. But as utility rates continue to rise and installation costs fall, he expects onsite power to become cost-competitive with the grid at “almost 100%” of sites within five years. The startup estimates that would unlock a whopping $12 billion in potential project value.
Veckta wouldn’t capture all that itself, of course. Rather, it generates revenue in two ways: buyers pay an upfront platform fee, and the winning supplier pays a success fee once a contract is signed. Evans told me the startup has been net profitable for the past year, though he would not share specifics. So far in 2026, customers have signed contracts for onsite energy projects at 128 sites. These typically range from 250 kilowatts for businesses like car dealerships and retail stores to 10 megawatts or more for manufacturing facilities, warehouses, or cold storage facilities. “That ranges from Fortune 500s right down to your individual business owner,” Evans told me.
With this latest raise, Veckta plans to expand its supplier network and grow its sales, marketing, and customer support teams. It also wants to help customers capture additional revenue streams from their onsite energy systems, such as by connecting them with demand-response programs, using batteries to provide grid services like frequency regulation, and selling renewable energy credits.
Named customers include rental car company Enterprise Mobility, real estate investment trust Regency Centers, and auto dealership group Lithia & Driveway. About 80% of the projects the platform facilitates today involve rooftop solar paired with batteries, but the company has begun to branch out.
“We’ve done waste-heat-to-energy, we’ve done EV chargers, done backup generators, and then the latest is, we’ve just finished our first pilot on roof replacements,” Evans told me. “We are firm believers that for any complex purchase that is a non-commodity that you can’t just buy off the shelf, we are best placed to help our customers competitively source those deals.”