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:
The Department of Energy is advancing 24 companies in its purchase prize contest. What these companies are getting is more important than $50,000.

The Department of Energy is advancing its first-of-a-kind program to stimulate demand for carbon removal by becoming a major buyer. On Tuesday, the agency awarded $50,000 to each of 24 semifinalist companies competing to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere on behalf of the U.S. government. It will eventually spend $30 million to buy carbon removal credits from up to 10 winners.
The nascent carbon removal industry is desperate for customers. At a conference held in New York City last week called Carbon Unbound, startup CEOs brainstormed how to convince more companies to buy carbon removal as part of their sustainability strategies. On the sidelines, attendees lamented to me that there were hardly even any potential buyers at the conference — what a missed opportunity.
Conference panelists asserted that the industry needed to rebuild trust. Purchasing carbon credits has become a risky strategy for companies. In one investigation after another, journalists and researchers have shown that many of the projects behind these credits fail to produce the climate benefits they advertise. There’s a class action lawsuit against Delta Air Lines for marketing itself as “carbon neutral” after purchasing such questionable carbon offsets.
Carbon removal credits are technically different from the offsets that companies bought in the past, which were based on projects that reduce emissions to the atmosphere rather than remove carbon that’s already heating the planet. But there’s still a risk of sham projects. And because the field is relatively new, there’s not yet a set of widely agreed-upon standards to measure and verify how much carbon is being removed.
The Department of Energy hopes that by selecting 24 companies that have been vetted by government scientists, it’s sending a signal to the private sector that there are at least some projects that are legitimate. “We can’t wait to invest in CDR until those standards have been codified,” Noah Deich, the agency’s deputy assistant secretary of carbon management, told me. “We need to invest now so that we actually get the data that we can use to inform the standards, and then over time codify those standards and strengthen and improve them.”
The semifinalists represent a wide range of carbon removal methods. Nine of the companies are building machines that capture carbon dioxide directly from the air. Seven take advantage of the natural ability of plants and algae to suck up carbon, and have developed systems to sequester that carbon for far longer than would otherwise occur. Five employ rocks that naturally absorb carbon and have figured out how to speed up the process. The last three capture carbon from the ocean, enabling the world’s biggest carbon sink to draw down more from the atmosphere.
To proceed to the final round, all of these companies will have to draw up contracts that say how quickly they will be able to remove the promised tons of carbon, and who they will work with to measure and verify the process.
The Biden administration is spending billions on research, development, and deployment of carbon removal. Some of the semifinalists, like Climeworks, Heirloom Carbon, and 1PointFive, were already selected for grants from the DOE to build the U.S.’s first “direct air capture hubs” — projects capable of removing one million tons of carbon from the air per year. But those hubs will fail if the companies don’t ultimately find buyers for their carbon removal. “Every single CDR project that we’re seeing today requires some sort of voluntary credit sale to be profitable,” said Deich.
The Department of Energy’s $30 million budget to buy carbon removal is relatively small. The semifinalists said they could deliver a wide range of credits with their share of the funds, from 3,000 over a three-year period, to more than 30,000. In any case, DOE is unlikely to afford much more than 100,000 tons of carbon taken out of the atmosphere, equivalent to about 0.002% of the CO2 the United States emitted in 2022. When distributed among 10 companies, it’s certainly not enough to finance a project. But Deich told me he sees this contest as a public-private partnership. The agency is challenging the semifinalists to leverage the DOE’s recognition to try and sell as many credits as they can. It’s one of the criteria they’ll be judged on for the final phase of the contest.
Several semifinalists I spoke with were optimistic the DOE’s backing would help. “One of the things that the private sector is wrestling with is the technical underwriting of various carbon dioxide removal technologies,” Barclay Rogers, the CEO of the carbon removal company Graphyte, told me. Graphyte’s process almost sounds too simple to work. The company takes discarded plant matter from forests and fields, dries it out so that it doesn’t decompose, compresses it into bricks, and then buries them. Graphyte has already built a small processing facility in Arkansas and secured a burial site that could store an estimated 1.5 million tons of CO2. Rogers was excited to have DOE’s backing as “a broad signal to the market of the viability of Graphyte’s carbon casting process.”
Others were grateful that the government was branching out to new technologies. To date, most of the DOE’s carbon removal programs have supported direct air capture. Companies working on other approaches have been shut out of funding opportunities, and some worry that this has contributed to a perception among buyers that direct air capture is the only valid method. “We think this is a huge step forward, since it’s really the first time not only that the U.S. government is going to become a purchaser of carbon removal, but also funding a full range of carbon removal solutions,” Nora Cohen Brown, head of market development and policy at Charm Industrial, told me. (Charm also buries plant waste underground, but in the form of oil.) “We really think that biomass CDR has immense potential,” she said. “It’s a big deal to have DOE’s blessing for that pathway.”
Edward Sanders, the chief operating officer of a startup called Equatic, told me that being a semifinalist meant the company would be able to build a plant in the U.S. much sooner than it initially planned. Equatic has developed technology to remove carbon from seawater, enabling the ocean to take up more carbon. It’s currently building its first large-scale plant in Singapore. “This tells prospective future buyers that there is a role to play in the near term in the U.S. for a marine-based pathway.”
Many of the companies on the list, including the three I just mentioned, have already been relatively successful in selling credits. Graphyte sold 10,000 to American Airlines. Equatic has a 62,000 deal with Boeing. Charm will remove more than 100,000 tons for Frontier Climate, a group of buyers that includes Stripe, Alphabet, Shopify, and Meta. But even though a handful of tech companies and airlines are buying carbon removal, these sweeping gestures are not enough to sustain the industry, let alone grow it to the scale that scientists say will be necessary to halt climate change.
DOE’s purchase may help increase confidence in some of these companies and approaches, but it may not do much to solve another problem: There’s little incentive for anyone to pay for carbon removal today, and it’s much more expensive than other options companies have to reduce their emissions. Credits can cost between several hundred to more than a thousand dollars each.
Deich said the agency was trying to set an example for other buyers. Instead of creating a net-zero target and searching for the cheapest credits to accomplish its goal, it’s prioritizing quality and only buying what it can afford. “We need to pay what it costs,” he said, “and then developers can develop projects and figure out how to do it cheaper so that over time, it starts to come down the cost curve significantly, and we can buy larger and larger quantities.”
But this is only the near term plan to help the industry mature. Ultimately, Deich doesn’t think that the voluntary trade of credits will be enough to support the levels of carbon removal that will make a difference in climate change. He sees this purchase prize program as a way to start building the government’s capacity to play a larger role. “There’s going to need to be some sort of mandate or public procurement that happens for the field to really scale beyond 2030,” he said.
Avnos, Inc. — direct air capture — 3,000 credits
Carbon America — direct Air Capture — 3,400 credits
CarbonCapture, Inc. — direct air capture — 3,333 credits
Climeworks — direct air capture — 3,500 credits
Global Thermostat and Fervo Energy — direct air capture — 3,500 credits
Heirloom — direct air capture — 3,030 credits
1PointFive — direct air capture — 3,861 credits
280 Earth — direct air capture — 3,000 credits
8 Rivers — direct air capture — 7,200 credits
Arbor Energy — biomass with carbon removal and storage — 8,000 credits
Carbon Lockdown — biomass with carbon removal and storage — 17,143 credits
Charm Industrial — biomass with carbon removal and storage — 5,000 credits
Clean Energy Systems — biomass with carbon removal and storage — 11,320 credits
Climate Robotics — biochar — 30,252 credits
Graphyte — biomass with carbon removal and storage — 30,000 credits
Vaulted Deep — biomass with carbon removal and storage — 10,320 credits
Alkali Earth — enhanced rock weathering and mineralization — 8,108 credits
CREW Carbon — enhanced rock weathering and mineralization — 7,500 credits
Eion — enhanced rock weathering and mineralization — 9,900 credits
Lithos Carbon — enhanced rock weathering and mineralization — 8,109 credits
Mati Carbon — enhanced rock weathering and mineralization — 4,561 credits
Ebb Carbon — marine-based carbon removal — 3,000 credits
Equatic — marine-based carbon removal — 6,521 credits
Vycarb Inc. — marine-based carbon removal — 3,000 credits
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The offshore wind developer was in the process of completing necessary repairs when the administration issued its stop work order, according to court filings.
In the Atlantic ocean south of Massachusetts, 10 wind turbine towers, each 500 feet tall, stand stripped of their rotary blades. Stuck in this bald state due to the Trump administration’s halt on offshore wind construction, the towers are susceptible to lightning strikes and water damage. This makes them a potential threat to public safety, according to previously unreported court filings from the project developer, Vineyard Wind.
The company filed for an injunction against Trump’s stop work order last week. The order posed a unique threat to Vineyard Wind, as the project is 95% complete and its contract with a key construction boat is set to expire on March 31, the filing said. “If construction is not completed by that date, the partially completed wind turbines will be left in an unsafe condition and Vineyard Wind will incur a series of financial consequences that it likely could not survive,” the company wrote.
One of the final tasks the company was working on was replacing faulty blades on nearly two dozen turbine towers. In July 2024, one of the installed blades snapped in two, sending fiberglass and other debris crashing into the sea and eventually onto the beaches of Nantucket. The incident revealed a manufacturing defect at the Canadian factory where the blades were made. After multiple investigations into the incident, the company reached an agreement with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement to replace the defective equipment with blades produced at a different factory in France.
Trump’s construction freeze contained an exception for activities “necessary to respond to emergency situations and/or to prevent impacts to health, safety, and the environment.” So after the order came down on December 22, Vineyard Wind reached out to the relevant regulators and asked permission to continue its blade replacement process on safety grounds, the company explained in court filings. BSEE responded that the company could remove the faulty blades on the 10 remaining towers, but could not replace them.
The decision highlights an apparent double standard in the administration’s considerations of public safety. The stop work order itself was intended to “protect the American people,” according to Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum. Yet the agency has refused to let construction move forward to mitigate risks created by the stoppage.
Testimony submitted by Steven Simkins, Vineyard Wind’s Wind turbine team lead, describes the dangers of leaving the towers bladeless for an extended period of time — a risk compounded by the ticking clock on the company’s construction boat contract. “The wind turbine was designed to be constructed completely and only be in a hammerhead state, without blades, for a brief amount of time during installation,” Simkins wrote.
He warned of three main liabilities. First, the towers are equipped with a lightning protection system, but the system’s receptors and conductors extend along the blades. Without the blades, the towers are essentially lightning rods, at risk of igniting an electrical fire, Simkins explained.
The three giant holes where the blades would be installed are also sitting open, with tarps covering them as temporary protection. That means that water, ice, and humidity could get into the nacelle, the top part of the tower that houses all of the electrical and mechanical systems, which are not designed to weather this kind of exposure. “Not only will this lead to prolonged offshore work replacing damaged equipment but it also puts the safety of the workers at risk,” Simkins wrote. “Electrical cabinets that have experienced some level of corrosion become less safe and increase the risk of an arc flash event.”
Lastly, the 500-foot towers are being roiled by winter wind and waves, which causes them to sway. The blades are designed to capture that wind, reducing its force on the towers. Without them, the “fatigue” on the towers will be exacerbated, “and the design has accounted for a limited amount of such fatigue over the total life of the structure.”
Court documents show that Vineyard Wind — the last of five affected companies to file for an injunction against Trump’s stop work order — held off on litigation as it made multiple attempts to convince the administration that completing blade installation was necessary to mitigate safety risks.
Vineyard Wind also sent BSEE verification of its safety claims by DNV Energy Systems, a Danish company it was required to retain to “ensure that the Project is installed in accordance with accepted engineering practices and, when necessary, to provide reports to BSEE regarding incidents affecting Critical Safety Systems.” But BSEE disagreed and denied Vineyard Wind’s request.
The Trump administration filed a response in the case on Tuesday, with BSEE’s Principal Deputy Director Kenneth Stevens testifying that the bureau’s technical personnel had “determined that there should be no structural issues associated with the tower and nacelle-only configuration if they were installed correctly.” He noted that the towers had been “routinely left in this configuration repeatedly” while the project was under construction over the past year and a half “with no reported adverse impacts to safety.”
Vineyard Wind did not respond to a request for comment on that assertion. A hearing in the case is scheduled for Friday. Three separate district judges have already granted injunctions to offshore projects affected by the stop work order: Revolution Wind, Empire Wind, and Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia offshore wind project. Each judge found that the companies were “likely” to succeed in showing that the stop work order violated the Administrative Procedures Act, and allowing them to continue construction.
Jael Holzman contributed reporting.
One of the buzziest climate tech companies in our Insiders Survey is pushing past the “missing middle.”
One of the buzziest climate tech companies of the past year is proving that a mature, hitherto moribund technology — conventional geothermal — still has untapped potential. After a breakthrough year of major discoveries, Zanskar has raised a $115 million Series C round to propel what’s set to be an investment-heavy 2026, as the startup plans to break ground on multiple geothermal power plants in the Western U.S.
“With this funding, we have a six power plant execution plan ahead of us in the next three, four years,” Diego D’Sola, Zanskar’s head of finance, told me. This, he estimates, will generate over $100 million of revenue by the end of the decade, and “unlock a multi-gigawatt pipeline behind that.”
The size of the round puts a number to climate world’s enthusiasm for Zanskar. In Heatmap’s Insider’s Survey, experts identified Zanskar as one of the most promising climate tech startups in operation today.
Zanskar relies on its suite of artificial intelligence tools to locate previously overlooked conventional geothermal resources — that is, naturally occurring reservoirs of hot water and steam. Trained on a combination of exclusive subsurface datasets, modern satellite and remote sensing imagery, and fresh inputs from Zanksar’s own field team, the company’s AI models can pinpoint the most promising sites for exploration and even guide exactly what angle and direction to drill a well from.
Early last year, Zanskar announced that it had successfully revitalized an underperforming geothermal power plant in New Mexico by drilling a new pumped well nearby, which has since become the most productive well of this type in the U.S. That was followed by the identification of a large geothermal resource in northern Nevada, where exploratory wells had been drilled for decades but no development had ever occurred. Just last month, the company revealed a major discovery in western Nevada — a so-called “blind” geothermal system with no visible surface activity such as geysers or hot springs, and no history of exploratory drilling.
“This is a site nobody had ever had on the radar, no prior exploration,” Carl Hoiland, Zanskar’s CEO, told me of this latest discovery, dubbed “Big Blind.” He described it as a tipping point for the industry, which had investors saying, “Okay, this is starting to look more like a trend than just an anomaly.”
Spring Lane Capital led Zanskar’s latest round, which also included Obvious Ventures, Union Square Ventures, and Lowercarbon Capital, among others. Spring Lane aims to fill the oft-bemoaned “missing middle” of climate finance — the stage at which a startup has matured beyond early-stage venture backing but is still considered too risky for more traditional infrastructure investors.
Zanskar now finds itself squarely in that position, needing to finance not just the drills, turbines, and generators for its geothermal plants, but also the requisite permitting and grid interconnection costs. D’Sola told me that he expects the company to close its first project financing this quarter, explaining that its ambitious plans require “north of $600 million in total capital expenditures, the vast majority of which will come from non-dilutive sources or project level financing.”
Unsurprisingly, the company anticipates that data centers will be some of its first customers, with hyperscalers likely working through utilities to secure the clean energy attributes of Zanskar’s grid-connected power. And while the West Coast isn’t the primary locus of today’s data center buildout, Hoiland thinks Zanskar’s clean, firm, low-cost power will help draw the industry toward geothermally rich states such as Utah and Nevada, where it’s focused.
“We see a scenario where the western U.S. is going to have some of the cheapest carbon-free energy, maybe anywhere in the world, but certainly in the United States.” Hoiland told me.
Just how cheap are we talking? Using the levelized cost of energy — which averages the lifetime cost of building and operating a power plant per unit of electricity generated — Zanskar plans to deliver electricity under $45 per megawatt-hour by the end of this decade. For context, the Biden administration set that same cost target for next-generation geothermal systems such as those being pursued by startups like Fervo Energy and Eavor — but projected it wouldn’t be reached 2035.
At this price point, conventional geothermal would be cheaper than natural gas, too. The LCOE for a new combined-cycle natural gas plant in the U.S. typically ranges from $48 to $107 per megawatt-hour.
That opens up a world of possibilities, Hoiland said, with the startup’s’s most optimistic estimates showing that conventional geothermal could potentially supply all future increases in electricity demand. “But really what we’re trying to meet is that firm, carbon-free baseload requirement, which by some estimates needs to be 10% to 30% of the total mix,” Hoiland said. “We have high confidence the resource can meet all of that.”
On New Jersey’s rate freeze, ‘global water bankruptcy,’ and Japan’s nuclear restarts
Current conditions: A major winter storm stretching across a dozen states, from Texas to Delaware, and could hit by midweek • The edge of the Sahara Desert in North Africa is experiencing sandstorms kicked up by colder air heading southward • The Philippines is bracing for a tropical cyclone heading toward northern Luzon.
Mikie Sherrill wasted no time in fulfilling the key pledge that animated her campaign for governor of New Jersey. At her inauguration Tuesday, the Democrat signed a series of executive orders aimed at constraining electricity bills and expanding energy production in the state. One order authorized state utility regulators to freeze rate hikes. Another directed the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities “to open solicitations for new solar and storage power generation, to modernize gas and nuclear generation so we can lower utility costs over the long term.” Now, as Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin put it, “all that’s left is the follow-through,” which could prove “trickier than it sounds” due to “strict deadlines to claim tax credits for renewable energy development looming.”
Last month, the environmental news site Public Domain broke a big story: Karen Budd-Falen, the No. 3 official at the Department of the Interior, has extensive financial ties to the controversial Thacker Pass lithium mine in northern Nevada that the Trump administration is pushing to fast track. Now The New York Times is reporting that House Democrats are urging the Interior Department’s inspector general to open an investigation into the multimillion-dollar relationship Budd-Falen’s husband has with the mine’s developer. Frank Falen, her husband, sold water from a family ranch in northern Nevada to the subsidiary of Lithium Americas for $3.5 million in 2019, but the bulk of the money from the sale depended on permit approval for the project. Budd-Falen did not reveal the financial arrangement on any of her four financial disclosures submitted to the federal government when she worked for the Interior Department during President Donald Trump’s first term from 2018 to 2021.
House Republicans, meanwhile, are planning to vote this week to undo Biden-era restrictions on mining near more than a million acres of Minnesota wilderness. “Mining is huge in Minnesota. And all mining helps the school trust fund in Minnesota as well. So it benefits all schools in the state,” Representative Pete Stauber, a Minnesota Republican and the chair of the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, said of the rule-killing bill he sponsored. While the vote is expected to draw blowback from environmentalists, E&E News noted that it could also agitate proceduralists who oppose the GOP’s continued “use of the rule-busting Congressional Review Act for actions that have not been traditionally seen as rules.” Still, the move is likely to fuel the dealmaking boom for critical minerals. As Heatmap’s Katie Brigham wrote in September, “everybody wants to invest” in startups promising to mine and refine the metals over which China has a near monopoly.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
A new United Nations report declares that the world has entered an era of “global water bankruptcy,” putting billions of people at risk. In an interview with The Guardian, Kaveh Madani, the report’s lead author, said that while not every basin and country is directly at risk, trade and migration are set to face calamity from water shortages. Upward of 75% of people live in countries classified as water insecure or critically water insecure, and 2 billion people live on land that is sinking as groundwater aquifers collapse. “This report tells an uncomfortable truth: Many critical water systems are already bankrupt,” Madani said. “It’s extremely urgent [because] no one knows exactly when the whole system would collapse.”

The Democratic Republic of the Congo has given the U.S. government a vetted list of mining and processing projects open to American investment. The shortlist, which Mining.com said was delivered to U.S. officials last week, includes manganese, gold, and cassiterite licenses; a copper-cobalt project and a germanium-processing venture; four gold permits; a lithium license; and mines producing cobalt, gold, and tungsten. The potential deals are an outgrowth of the peace agreement Trump brokered between the DRC and Rwanda-backed rebels, and could offer Washington a foothold in a mineral-rich country whose resources China has long dominated. But establishing an American presence in an unstable African country is a risky investment. As I reported for Heatmap back in October, the Denver-based Energy Fuels’ $2 billion mining project in Madagascar was suddenly thrown into chaos when the island nation’s protests resulted in a coup, though the company has said recently it’s still moving forward.
The Tokyo Electric Power Company is delaying the restart of the Kashiwazaki Kariwa nuclear power station in western Japan after an alarm malfunction. The alarm system for the control rods that keep the fission reaction in check failed to sound during a test operation on Tuesday, Tepco said. The world’s largest nuclear plant had been scheduled to restart one of its seven reactors on Tuesday. Fuel loading for the reactor, known as Unit 6, was completed in June. It’s unclear when the restart will now take place.
The delay marks a setback for Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who has made restarting the reactors idled after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and expanding the nuclear industry a top priority, as I told you in October. But as I wrote last month in an exclusive about Japan’s would-be national small modular reactor champion, the country has a number of potential avenues to regain its nuclear prowess beyond just reviving its existing fleet.
As a fourth-generation New Yorker, I’m qualified to say something controversial: I love, and often even prefer, Montreal-style bagels. They’re smaller, more efficient, and don’t deliver the same carbohydrate bomb to my gut. Now the best-known Montreal-style bagel place in the five boroughs has found a way to use the energy needed to make their hand-rolled, wood-fired bagels more efficiently, too. Black Seed Bagels’ catering kitchen in northern Brooklyn is now part of a battery pilot program run by David Energy, a New York-based retail energy provider. The startup supplied suitcase-sized batteries for free last August, allowing Black Seed to disconnect from ConEdison’s grid during hours when electricity rates are particularly high. “We’re in the game of nickels and dimes,” Noah Bernamoff, Black Seed’s co-owner, told Canary Media. “So we’re always happy to save the money.” Wise words.