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:
Isometric is trying to become the most trusted name in the scandal-plagued carbon market.

Regulations are probably coming for the scandal-plagued voluntary carbon market. After years of mounting skepticism and reports of greenwashing, governments are now attempting to rein in the historically unchecked web of platforms, registries, protocols, and verification bodies offering ways to offset a company’s emissions that vary tremendously in price and quality. Europe has developed its own rules, the Carbon Removal Certification Framework, while the Biden administration earlier this year announced a less comprehensive set of general principles. Plus, there are already mandatory carbon credit schemes around the world, such as California’s cap-and-trade program and the E.U. Emissions Trading System.
“The idea that a voluntary credit should be a different thing than a compliance credit, obviously doesn’t make sense, right?” Ryan Orbuch, Lowercarbon Capital’s carbon removal lead, told me. “You want it to be as likely as possible that the thing you’re buying today is going to count in a compliance regime.”
That’s where the carbon credit certification platform Isometric comes into play. Founded in 2022, the startup raised $25 million in its seed round last year, co-led by Lowercarbon and Plural, a European venture capital firm. It has created a rigorous, scientifically-driven standard for carbon removal credits, with the intention of becoming the benchmark that buyers, sellers, and other stakeholders can coalesce around. So whenever federal standards or compliance regimes do kick in, there will be no doubt whether Isometric-verified credits are up to snuff.
“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, chief commercial officer at Isometric, told me. He believes that the government’s role in the carbon market should mirror the financial sector, but instead of preventing insider trading or predatory lending, federal regulators would make high-level determinations on things like what types of credits count and how long carbon must be locked away to count as “permanent removal.” Platforms like Isometric (often referred to as registries) could then focus on setting more granular, scientifically specific requirements for particular methods of carbon removal.
The startup aims to separate itself from existing registries, which include Puro.earth, Verra, and the Gold Standard, in two big ways.
First is just a focus on science. May said that 15 of Isometric’s first 25 hires were scientists. Today, the company’s chief scientist is Jennifer Wilcox, who recently left her position on the leadership team at the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, housed within the U.S. Department of Energy. Other registries, he told me, are “filled with NGO types” and “policy people” who lack the technical background to, say, evaluate what types rock formations are best for the geological sequestration of bio-oil or how CO2 fluxes in the soil impact enhanced rock weathering. These types of in-the-weeds analyses are integral to establishing stringent protocols to validate the amount of carbon that’s actually been removed.
Additionally, May, Orbuch, and Khaled Helioui, a partner at Plural who led the firm’s investment in Isometric, all said the company fixes a key flaw in the voluntary carbon market —- alignment of financial incentives. Traditionally, carbon removal suppliers pay registries to certify their credits, which creates an incentive for registries to overlook lax standards. But Isometric is instead paid a flat fee by the buyers for performing verification work on a per-ton basis.
This year, Isometric verified its first credits ever, from the carbon removal companies Vaulted Deep, which collects sludgy, organic waste and deposits it underground, and Charm Industrial, which injects processed biomass into abandoned oil and gas wells. Credits from these two suppliers were sold to Frontier, the carbon-removal initiative led by the payments firm Stripe. Just last week, Frontier identified Isometric as its first and only leading credit issuer.
“What makes Isometric stand out is they’re explicitly focused on durable CDR [carbon dioxide removal],” Joanna Klitzke, Frontier’s procurement and ecosystem strategy lead, told me. “Durable” refers to the fact that Isometric’s projects must sequester CO2 for 1,000 years or more. “They’re building tech products that make data and reporting particularly easy for suppliers and for credit management,” she added.
Everyone is essentially trying to avoid another scandal like the one that engulfed rainforest carbon offsets, which were found to be largely worthless. The industry has thus been shifting away from more nebulous carbon offsets, which seek to avoid future emissions by preventing deforestation or funding renewables development, and towards more concrete, but often more expensive, forms of carbon removal — think direct air capture, enhanced rock weathering, or biomass carbon removal and storage, all of which have seen a boom in investment.
“As carbon removal was emerging as a new and potentially very exciting way to do this stuff, potentially more measurable and more rigorous, we couldn’t just sit and watch the same registries do the same thing,” May told me, saying doing so would “destroy trust in the carbon removal industry before it’s even off the ground.”
In a past life, Isometric’s founder and CEO, Eamon Jubbawy, founded a digital identity verification company for the financial services industry. This gave investors confidence that he could bring his expertise in trust-building and verification services to the carbon removal space.
“It’s not a like for like, but there’s a lot of overlap in terms of actually introducing efficiency, effectiveness, and having technology really open a market,” Plural’s Helioui told me. “This is not an endeavor or an opportunity where I would have been necessarily that keen to back a first-time founder, just because of the complexity of what you need to manage,” he said. “We’re really talking about market creation.”
But May doesn’t expect Isometric to totally dominate other registries. Just like there are many private banks, May envisions an “ecosystem of high quality registries,” eventually unified around a set of federal guardrails. Until then, he believes Isometric’s role is to “set a bar that is so high that the expectation and norm in the market shifts,” thus avoiding a race to the bottom where companies are able to greenwash their image with cheap, low-quality credits.
Now, not every company can afford the highest quality credits. And because of Isometric’s 1,000-year storage requirement, many cheaper, nature-based projects, such as reforestation, are excluded from its registry, even though there’s still demand for them. Orbuch told me that Isometric will continue adding guidelines for different carbon removal pathways, as it recently did for biochar, a charcoal-like brick that locks up carbon contained within biomass.
It’s still early days, and there’s plenty of room for Isometric to grow alongside the market. After all, it’s only issued 5,350 carbon removal credits to date, while nearly two billion credits have been issued in the voluntary carbon market overall.
“The whole industry needs to be scaling up,” May told me. “So we need to, in 10 years time, be, you know, issuing and verifying hundreds of millions, if not billions, of credits annually.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Current conditions: Tropical Storm Cristina is inching north toward landfall in Central America, threatening floods, landslides, and winds of up to 73 miles per hour • Washington, D.C., is poised for rain for the rest of the week as temperatures rise to nearly 100 degrees Fahrenheit by Friday • By contrast, Cartersville, Georgia, where the solar manufacturer Qcells just started up its factory, is looking at a two-day break of sunshine from an otherwise gray and wet forecast.
At the start of 2023, South Korea’s biggest solar manufacturer, Qcells, began construction on a sweeping new factory northwest of Atlanta in Cartersville, Georgia. Betting that U.S. tariffs on Chinese solar panels were here to stay, the company gambled on bringing most of the supply chain under one roof. On Tuesday, Qcells started producing solar cells at the plant, marking what it called “a major milestone toward completing the country’s only vertically integrated solar manufacturing plant.” The firm expects to reach full production by the third quarter of this year. The factory’s module assembly line, meanwhile, is now at full capacity, building 16,700 panels per day. “Producing the first solar cells at Cartersville is a milestone for Qcells and for American manufacturing,” Andy Park, the global chief executive of Qcells, said in a statement. “As our ingot, wafer, and cell lines reach full capacity, we’ll be making the major components of a solar panel right here in Georgia.”
The U.S. could be seeing the start of a small solar boom. Last year alone, at least 30 new utility-scale solar factories came online, as Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo reported last month.
Over the weekend, as I told you on Monday, a federal court blocked the Trump administration’s rules for using the soon-to-expire tax writeoffs for investing in or producing electricity from solar panels and wind turbines. But with just 24 days to go until the tax credits officially end, few developers are likely to move quickly enough to benefit from the ruling. “Practically speaking, I don’t think this is likely to have much impact on the market or behavior in the coming weeks,” Heather Cooper, a tax lawyer at McDermott Will & Schulte, told E&E News. “The deadline is less than four weeks away.”
Investments into electrical grids are on track to surpass $650 billion globally this year, according to new data from the consultancy Rystad Energy. That’s up 5% from last year and more than double the investments recorded in 2020, PV Magazine reported. The high cost comes as long lead times and pricy components for transformers, high-voltage circuit breakers, and switchgears strain and stall upgrades and expansions to power systems all over the world. The soaring growth of wind and solar is propelling grid investments, which are needed to patch more intermittent and often far-flung renewables onto the system. In 2010, wind and solar made up just 2% of global generation. By 2040, Rystad expects them to make up nearly half the mix.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Everyone recognizes Canada as a major oil producer, metal miner, and hydroelectricity generator. But did you know the Canucks are not just a serious player in nuclear power, but actually have their own domestically-designed reactor that can run on raw uranium? Get this, it even has a catchy name: the CANDU. Pronounced CAN-do and short for Canada Deuterium Uranium, the pressurized heavy water reactors are among the only commercial designs in the world that can run on unenriched, natural uranium. The advantage, especially for a country like Canada with vast uranium deposits, is that they’re faster to build, cheaper to fuel, and free of the international scrutiny that comes with enriching uranium. The downside is that they break down faster than the light water reactors that make up the entirety of the U.S. fleet. But Canada is demonstrating that isn’t a big problem. On Monday, the Bruce nuclear power station brought its Unit 3 reactor back online, completing refurbishments seven months early and $107 million under budget, NucNet reported. You don’t need to know a lot about the American or European nuclear industries to know “early and under budget” aren’t words typically associated with any recent or ongoing projects.
The best-proven way to make truly green steel involves turning iron ore into direct reduced iron through a process that, when powered by green hydrogen instead of natural gas, significantly slashes any carbon emissions associated with its production. Assuming it’s finished off in an electric arc furnace, it’s green steel — and even greener if that final process was powered by renewables or nuclear. Yet despite some high-profile projects, green hydrogen has remained too expensive in the West, even as China’s industry starts to boom. That could be changing. On Tuesday, the German steelmaker Salzgitter inked its first major offtake agreement for green hydrogen from the supplier EWE, Hydrogen Insight reported. One of Germany’s largest steel producers, Salzgitter will buy roughly 10,000 metric tons of hydrogen per year from the electrolyzer plant EWE is building in Emden, near the Dutch border.
Meanwhile in America, U.S. Steel unveiled plans to invest up to $2.5 billion into upgrading the Mon Valley Works, southeast of Pittsburgh. The renovations come after Japanese steel giant Nippon’s takeover of the iconic American firm last year. To win President Donald Trump’s blessing, Nippon gave the federal government a “golden share” in the company. As Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin wrote last year, that could ultimately give a future administration leverage to press U.S. Steel to green its operations.

If you’re booking a flight right now, you might not yet be feeling the difference. But U.S. production of jet fuel has reached record highs as refiners scramble to respond to soaring prices following the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. By the start of May, the four-week average estimate of fuel production surpassed 2 million barrels per day for the first time on record, according to new analysis by the Energy Information Administration. But with domestic inventories still relatively high, much of that increased production is being exported.
Entech’s S2 platform debuted last year to help make century-old boilers more efficient.
Emissions from existing buildings are responsible for about 70% of New York City’s climate emissions, with space heating as the dominant source. Yet most of the city’s multifamily buildings still rely on central steam boilers that cycle on and off when the outdoor temperature drops below a certain threshold, regardless of indoor conditions. The result is a system that leaves many residents sweltering in the dead of winter, wasting fuel and money while releasing unnecessary greenhouse gases.
Completely overhauling and modernizing a central boiler system — many of which date to the early 1900s — and installing a building-scale heat pump could address many of these issues. But that’s an expensive, complex, and disruptive endeavor that many building owners either can’t afford or simply don’t want to undertake. And while heat pump startups such as Quilt and Gradient are making inroads in single-family homes and individual apartment units respectively, neither is working to optimize the operations of existing steam boilers, which remain the dominant heating source for New York’s apartment stock.
That’s where Entech, a 30-year-old building energy management company, comes in. The company’s platform has long used indoor sensors to monitor the performance of central boilers and help them run more efficiently. Last year, however, the company revamped its software to incorporate artificial intelligence. The new system, called S2, autonomously monitors 20-plus sensors installed throughout the buildings where it operates, adjusting heating cycles with greater precision while continuously tracking the overall health and performance of boiler room operations.
On Wednesday, the company announced the results from the S2’s first year of operations: Across 401 New York City apartment buildings, the platform slashed emissions by nearly 25%, avoiding more than 16,000 metric tons of carbon pollution and generating over $5 million in savings for property owners.
Previous iterations of the company’s tech relied on preset rules such as, “When it’s 55 degrees [Fahrenheit], you need a shorter cycle, and when it’s 20 degrees, you need a longer cycle,” Heather Zoberman, Entech’s director of product development, explained to me. Those settings dictated how long a boiler turned on and how long it stayed off. With AI, however, the company can measure how quickly individual units are actually heating up and adjust performance in real-time.
For a company that spent decades focused on incremental improvements to boiler operations, it’s a meaningful shift. “Now we have the ability to do flame modulation — so a higher flame, a lower flame— based on the load, based on the building temperatures,” Zoberman told me. The same level of granular control applies to the fans and pumps that move heat through the building, too. “A little bit slower fan, a little bit lower flame is really where you get those savings that add up,” she said. According to Entech, those savings are typically passed onto the residents, with the average tenant saving roughly $200 on heating costs last year.
While building owners are happy to see these savings too, many are turning to Entech primarily to comply with the New York City Council’s Local Law 97, which requires buildings larger than 25,000 square feet to cut emissions 40% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels, and reach net zero emissions by 2050.
The nonprofit housing developer and operator Breaking Ground, for example, builds supportive housing for low-income and formerly homeless New Yorkers, and has been doing so for decades. It adopted Entech’s new boiler control system just six months ago to comply with the emissions law. While Breaking Ground’s deputy VP of facility operations, Lorenzo Torres, didn’t have exact savings figures on hand, he said the system has saved the organization “a lot of money,” largely by enabling staff to remotely identify equipment issues such as leaks and temperature fluctuations without having to send anyone to the building and before they develop into expensive headaches.
“We do have a work order system, but data is only as true as the person that’s entering the data,” Torres explained. Thus if a tenant misidentifies an issue or fails to file a work order in the first place, Breaking Ground might assume everything is running efficiently. By contrast, “the S2 controller actually is able to, with conviction, let us know that there is an issue with the boiler,” he said.
What Entech’s system still can’t do is solve the problem of unit-level temperature variation. Factors such as floor level, window exposure, and radiator placement mean some apartments will naturally run hotter or colder than others. But because Entech primarily operates in apartment complexes with central boilers, it can still only make adjustments at the building level Because of this, its system could be a complement to something like a smart radiator, which can control how much heat each apartment receives.
Now, Entech is looking to expand beyond New York. Boston is a natural next market, Zoberman told me, given its stringent building emissions requirements. Chicago is also on the company’s radar, thanks in part to incentives from the natural gas utility People’s Gas, which can help offset the cost of energy efficiency upgrades. The company’s ambitions extend beyond just geographic expansion, however — it’s also broadening its platform to monitor and optimize central cooling systems and other electrified technologies such as heat pumps and mini splits.
It looks like it should have plenty of room to run. Additional jurisdictions from Washington D.C. to St. Louis are increasingly adopting hard caps on building emissions, while dozens more now require annual energy-use reporting — often a first step towards more stringent regulation.
On the long-time climate funder’s win-loss record, China’s clean energy manufacturing, and sunscreen.
Tom Steyer, the billionaire investor and climate activist, is probably not going to be California’s next governor.
While the Associated Press still hasn’t called the race (and votes are still being counted), outside observers such as Decision Desk HQ have projected the outcome. The likely winners of California’s top-two primary will be Xavier Becerra, a Democrat and former federal health secretary, and Steve Hilton, a British-born Republican and conservative commentator. They’ll face each other in the November election.
That means the country’s most ambitious state-level climate policy will probably wind up in Becerra’s hands. And Becerra, notably, has suggested he will look upon the state’s carbon-cutting goals more skeptically than California’s past two Democratic governors. He has committed neither to California’s goal of ending gas-powered vehicle sales by 2035, nor its goal of phasing out fossil fuels by 2045. And he has suggested the state has ignored affordability in its quest to cut carbon emissions.
“Can we make the 2045 goal? Sure would like to, but I’m not going to hang up our economy and families’ cost of living if we find that we’re not able to meet that goal,” he said in an interview earlier this year. His website lists “Energy and Utilities” but not climate change, as a top priority for his future administration, and adds for clarity: “Bill affordability will be at the center of my energy policy.”
All that will matter in the years to come. Yet the most significant immediate consequence — if Steyer does fail to make the run-off — might be for campaign finance. After Becerra (or an independent committee associated with him) accepted donations from Chevron and an oil and gas trade group, Steyer pounced. “Big Oil,” Steyer said, was betting on Becerra to dismantle California’s climate policy. Becerra retorted that he had sued oil companies as California’s attorney general. Then he kept Chevron’s money.
Subscribe to get Heatmap in your inbox daily.
That was just one episode in a long and complicated race, of course. But ultimately, it’s not clear that voters in one of the country’s most liberal polities cared about the donation or Becerra’s less ambitious approach to climate policy — or perhaps Steyer, a billionaire himself, was not the most persuasive critic of money’s corrosive influence in politics. Either way, Becerra’s successful primary campaign may signal a more conciliatory approach to fossil fuels from Democrats, even those from coastal, progressive states. (Heatmap, I hasten to add, doesn’t accept advertising or any other kind of sponsorship from oil and gas companies.)
What’s more cut and dried is that Steyer has donated an awe-inspiring amount of money to climate, environmental, and other progressive causes over the past 17 years, and now has little to show for it. It’s worth doing a brief tally: He spent $216 million on this run for governor, including more than $195 million on ads. He dropped another $342 million to run for president in 2020. Neither effort succeeded (assuming projections hold).
Then there’s the $90 million he spent on the Trump impeachment effort during the president’s first term, as well as the $58.5 million he gave to the NextGen Climate political action committee for the 2018 cycle. Steyer, in fact, helped found the NextGen Climate organization in 2013; he later gave it and a few other groups $74 million to turn out young voters on climate issues in the 2014 midterm, then donated at least another $25 million in 2016. His political spending from 2009 to 2017 came to $365.6 million, according to his own disclosures.
All in all, Steyer has spent roughly a billion dollars since 2009 to advance causes and issues that he cares about — as well as his own political career. Climate has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of this largesse.
And it hasn’t quite all been a wash. Steyer has seemingly had the most success doing what he knows best: for-profit investment. Galvanize, the climate-aware asset manager he co-founded in 2022 and co-chaired until last year, has closed at least $1 billion in funds, and raised $370 million as recently as March. And even as a political donor, Steyer has pulled off big wins when intervening in California’s referendum elections. He was the biggest donor to the “No on Prop 23” campaign in 2010, which successfully protected the state’s climate policy from a Koch brothers-funded effort to defang it. And he was the biggest single contributor to last year’s Prop 50 referendum, which allowed the state to join the Trump-initiated mid-decade redistricting war.
But it isn’t exactly an inspiring record. I would say Steyer is the New York Knicks of political giving, except the Knicks are good now. While Steyer’s money paid the rent for many climate activists, organizers, and wonks over the years — and played some role in creating the political moment that produced the Inflation Reduction Act — it hasn’t created the kind of durable majority for climate action that he may have once hoped. Perhaps that should invite some introspection: Has the effort to produce a pro-climate-action consensus failed despite its billionaire backers? Or because of them?
What has long perplexed me about Steyer is that even though he has spent much of his time as a candidate embracing the left — and allying himself with the Democratic Party’s various interest groups — he strikes a far more moderate tone in conversation. As he told me during a Heatmap event at last year’s San Francisco Climate Week, “No one’s going to adopt new technologies to be nice. They’re going to adopt new technologies because they’re better, because they’re a better deal, because they’re cheaper, or in some ways solve a pain point for the customer.” In that sense, at least, he believed the market could work. Whether a similar market exists for political donors is perhaps best left unanswered.
The Iran war — and the energy crisis it ignited — have been a gift to China’s clean energy manufacturing sector.
But they have also helped America’s oil and gas industry. A new round of government statistics, released today, show that America’s crude oil, petroleum product, and fuel oil exports surged by more than $8.7 billion in April. That helped push down the government’s volatile trade deficit to its lowest level in months. The Trump administration has sought to lower the trade deficit since taking office.
Incidentally, a tracker from researchers at Brown University estimates that Americans have paid an extra $56 billion for gasoline and diesel since the Iran war began.
It’s not exactly climate adaptation, but I’ll take it: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has amended the list of ingredients allowed in American sunscreen for the first time in 20 years, permitting the use of a stable and broad-spectrum chemical long permitted in European and Asian sunscreens.