Expert insights on climate project development

Carbon Removal Isn't One Technology—It's a Portfolio. And Your Career Depends on Understanding the Difference. The latest analysis of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies confirms a critical reality: net-zero success hinges not on a single silver bullet, but on navigating a complex landscape of cost, maturity, and risk. For professionals in energy, this is the new operating manual. Expert Deconstruction: Key Strategic Insights The Core Dilemma is Cost vs. Permanence. Nature-based solutions like Afforestation are low-cost and mature (TRL 8-9) but offer lower storage durability (10s-100s of years) with high reversal risk. In contrast, engineered solutions like Direct Air Capture (DACCS) promise geologic permanence (10,000+ years) but at a high cost and lower technical readiness. Maturity & Risk are Not Uniform. The CDR landscape is highly fragmented. Bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) is commercially ready (TRL 9), while most ocean-based methods are in early R&D (TRL 4-6). A critical, often overlooked risk is the complexity of Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV), which directly impacts the bankability of any CDR project. Career Evolution: From Specialist to Strategist The era of the single-technology specialist is ending. Your evolution is from a "Technical Expert" to a "CDR Portfolio Strategist." This means you stop evaluating one process in isolation. You start architecting integrated decarbonization pathways that blend mature, low-cost options for immediate impact with strategic investments in high-permanence, novel technologies for long-term security. Your 90-day plan becomes about mastering the techno-economic modeling that balances this entire portfolio. Strategic Upskilling Framework When considering your next move, don't just ask "which course?" Ask if the program is: Outcome-Focused? Does it deliver a specific, valuable capability, not just a certificate? Practitioner-Led? Is it taught by a "Who" with real-world project finance and development experience? Strategic Context? Does it teach the business "why" behind the technical "how"? What's one step you're taking this quarter to evolve from a technical expert into a strategic advisor who can navigate this complex CDR portfolio? #CarbonRemoval #Decarbonization #CDR #ClimateTech #EnergyTransition

🎯 The Hidden Foundation: Why Climate Risk Assessment Makes or Breaks NGO Projects After managing climate resilience initiatives across diverse contexts, I've discovered that the difference between projects that transform communities and those that simply spend budgets lies in one critical phase: comprehensive risk assessment. Most NGOs rush to solutions without truly understanding the risk landscape they're entering. The 4-Dimensional Risk Assessment Framework: 🌡️ Climate Hazard Mapping • Historical climate data analysis • Future projection scenarios • Extreme event frequency and intensity • Seasonal variability patterns 👥 Social Vulnerability Analysis • Demographic risk factors (age, gender, disability) • Economic exposure levels • Social network strength assessment • Cultural and linguistic considerations 🏗️ Infrastructure Vulnerability Review • Critical system dependencies • Redundancy and backup systems • Maintenance capacity evaluation • Technology appropriateness assessment 🌍 Ecosystem Services Evaluation • Natural buffer system health • Environmental degradation trends • Biodiversity loss impacts • Ecosystem restoration potential Critical insight: Risk assessment isn't a one-time activity—it's an ongoing process that should inform every project decision from design to implementation. What separates successful projects: They design for the worst-case scenario while building capacity for best-case outcomes. Practical tip: Spend 20% of your project design time on risk assessment. Communities that understand their full risk profile make better adaptation decisions. How do you approach risk assessment in your climate resilience projects? What risk factors do you find most organizations overlook? #ClimateRisk #NGOProjects #NGOs #ClimateResilience #RiskAssessment #ProjectDesign #project #projectmanagement #managers #sustainability #eu #europe #Africa #Egypt #Mediterranean

Last month, I talked to 40+ finance professionals working across the climate capital stack. Here are the most pressing challenges, opportunities, and insights that emerged: ⚙️ Hard Problems - Even proven tech struggles to scale: EV chargers and energy storage are mature technologies, but their merchant risk makes traditional project finance models break down. - First-of-kind (FOAK) projects remain fundamentally hard: LPO funding is likely ending, and few alternatives exist. The good news? Several new funds are targeting this gap - worth watching closely. 💬 Communication Challenges - The climate finance ecosystem speaks multiple languages: VCs talk TAM and dreams, project finance talks DSCR, insurers talk actuarial risk. Getting deals done requires translating between all of them. - Risk/reward misalignment plagues deals: Startups and VCs chase upside, but deployment partners bear downside risk. This fundamental tension delays scaling. - Climate still fights for credibility: "Senior stakeholders don't even understand Scope 1, 2, and 3," one banker shared. "Anything labeled climate gets immediately written off as concessionary." 📚 Knowledge Gaps - Deal structures remain bespoke: While startups have SAFEs and mature sectors have established project finance precedents, new climate technologies lack standardized financing models. Knowledge sharing between successful deals is almost non-existent. - The "finance-ready" paradox: Capital exists, but most projects aren't structured to receive it. Companies often start thinking about project finance years too late. 🌡️ Climate Risk - Insurance is the canary: Companies are pulling out of high-risk regions and wildly hiking rates. - Markets haven't caught up: This risk repricing isn't reflected in broader valuations...yet. - This disconnect is both terrifying and the biggest opportunity in the space. 🔥 Hot Topics - Nature & Biodiversity: Hard to quantify but drawing serious LP interest - Resilience & Adaptation: Finding new momentum as climate impacts accelerate and we prepare for a "don't-say-climate" presidency - Data Centers: Energy use + AI boom = unavoidable focus - Geothermal: Rising star for baseload power, especially post-Fervo - Global Standards: EU's CSRD and Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism will reshape supply chains regardless of US policy, with real ramifications for manufacturers in Asia and beyond. These conversations revealed just how hard—but also how essential—it is to align incentives, build trust, and bridge knowledge gaps across the climate finance ecosystem. As Eugene Kirpichov just wrote—we need systems thinking if we're going to tackle these wider problems. Anything missing here? What's on the top of your mind for 2025?

FOAK (first of a kind) climate projects are all the rage right now - and it makes sense why. They're desperately needed. I've spent the last few months digging into this big opportunity for climate startups, the challenges that come with it, and the organizations who are working to fill the gaps. Here are the spark notes on what I’ve learned so far: Climate startups are facing a bottleneck. Many have built prototypes and shown proof of concept, mostly on the back of VC dollars, but taking the necessary next step of piloting and deploying their tech at a commercial scale is more akin to a massive leap. Challenges include… Funding - VC dollars are no longer enough. Building capital intensive infrastructure requires risk tolerant project finance, non-dilutive funding, and often philanthropy, all working in tandem. Expertise - Startup founders are innovators, not developers or financiers. Nor should they try to become those things. Rather, they can succeed by pulling in support from experts in these areas. Partnerships - This is the biggest one, in my opinion. Commercial-scale tech deployment by growth stage startups is a hugely multifaceted process. In addition to the startup team, the financial stakeholders, and the development experts, you also need buy-in from market incumbents (public or private) who can champion the technology within the market and serve as initial customers, as well as community-based organizations where projects will be built. And you need all of these stakeholders aligned and collaborating smoothly. Talk about herding cats! I will be focusing my efforts in 2024 on building more collaboration and better partnerships within this space, so that we can drive climate impact and get these amazing technologies to market. Here is a list of some companies I’ve come across who are already doing amazing work in this space: Elemental Excelerator is playing a big role as a convener with leadership from folks like Dawn Lippert, Saritha Peruri, and Danya Hakeem. Many orgs are focused on funding scale up projects, like Breakthrough Energy’s Catalyst group, Prime Coalition, Trent Yang’s Galway Sustainable Capital, Inc, Generate, FullCycle, Keyframe, and Wavelength Infra (Caroline McGeough). Third Sphere is making it easier for startups to understand the process and access capital (Shaun Abrahamson, Shilpi Kumar, Stonly Blue) Others are running programs to help connect growth stage startups with market incumbents for pilot projects, like Newlab (Shaina Horowitz, Carlos E. Trevino, Liz Keen), Uptake Alliance (Chris Richardson), Black & Veatch’s Ignite Program, Accenture (Jonathan Weitz), and Deep Science Ventures’s FOAXIAL Accelerator (Ahmad Butt). Sightline Climate (CTVC) wrote an awesome article recently about two successful FOAKs with LanzaTech and H2 Green Steel. I can’t list them all and even if I could, I’m sure there are so many who I’ve missed. So I’ll ask you: who are the orgs leading the way on FOAK climate projects?

How can the world's international climate funds and development banks support countries in delivering the #justtransition? This is the theme of our latest case study at the Just Transition Finance Lab which focused on the design of the investment plan from phasing out coal and ramping up renewables in the West Balkans country of #NorthMacedonia. The plan is one of five Accelerating Coal Transition (ACT) country programmes led by the #ClimateInvestmentFunds (CIF). In this example, the national government worked with the #CIF and major MDBs such as the EBRD, as well as The World Bank on a long-term just energy transition investment plan. This unlocked initial concessional CIF funding of $85mn, which in turn will leverage a further $591mn in MDB and other funding, as part of a total $3bn in public and private financing that will be mobilised through to 2030. Just transition principles are at the heart of the investment plan in terms of its governance and stakeholder involvement, the investment in people and regional revitalisation as well as driving coal decommissioning and renewable energy expansion. Importantly, the plan looked beyond the immediate impact on workers to the wider economic development of regions. This is matched by a monitoring system with quantified just transition metrics. Three insights stand out: - first, the supreme importance of concessional capital and development finance to initiate the long-term planning and investment that the just transition requires; - second, the behavioural dimensions of the transition are critical in terms of moving beyond pure skilling issues to building public trust in the opportunities that skilling provides; - third, the people component of the transition needs to be frontloaded: communities have to get ready before they can start executing the technical activities The case study features insights from many of the people involved in shaping the plan from international financial institutions, as well as national policymakers and civil society. Hope you enjoy it - you can read it here: https://lnkd.in/enUCX8qh Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change & the Environment, Sharan Burrow, Catherine McKenna, Stephan Chambers, Rosey Hurst, Andy Griffiths, Sophia Tickell, Jodi-Ann Jue Xuan Wang,I Sangeeth Raja Selvaraju, Rowan Conway, Motoko Doolan, Isabel Blanco, Brendan Curran, Joana Gjinopulli, Cristian Carraretto, Gianpiero Nacci, Barbara Rambousek, Sung-Ah Kyun, Haley St. Dennis, Mark Nicholls, Georgina Kyriacou, Joseph Adjei, Dr. Andrea Iro, Nevena Smilevska, Olimpija Hristova Zaevska, PhD, Margherita Calderone, Stefan Kostovski

Having served as an advisor for some of the biggest buyers in the CDR market and supporting the earliest iterations of the Carbon Direct #Criteria for High Quality #CDR I know firsthand how difficult it is to navigate the challenges buyers face. Now that I’m sitting on the other side of the table and reviewing the Criteria from the project developer’s perspective I am doubly grateful for the expert guidance provided from groups like Carbon Direct, Microsoft, Stripe, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), CarbonPlan and others, without which this market would be even more fragmented and lost. With that in mind, I've been thinking a lot about community engagement lately and believe the aforementioned guidance from experts listed above put project developers like Spiritus on much firmer ground for getting this right than in generations past. 🏡 CDR projects should initiate community engagement as early as possible in the project development cycle to maximize involvement and impact. Spiritus is working with community engagement partners with a presence in Wyoming (it can’t be overstated how important it is not to parachute in without local context) to develop our engagement and benefit plans. We want to hear directly from stakeholders and affected communities to learn what they want to see out of Orchard 1. We will let the community tell us what they want from this project, not the other way around. 🛠 CDR projects should bring employment opportunities and benefits to communities where they are being sited. There are few places in the country where you can find a work force better suited for direct air capture and geologic sequestration than you will in Wyoming. Spiritus is committed to stepping into the employment gap left behind by the retirement of aging fossil infrastructure by hiring local and providing a living wage. We are committed to regularly revisiting our job training, recruitment, and hiring practices to ensure that benefits are going to local communities and underrepresented or economically marginalized populations. ⚡Direct Air Capture requires a lot of heat, energy, chemicals, and construction to durably remove large volumes of CO2 from the atmosphere. Reducing these critical inputs not only make DAC more economical and efficient but can also drive additional impact by reducing related externalities like exposure to criteria pollutants and dust from heavy traffic and construction that predominantly affect disadvantaged communities. Spiritus is bringing a new generation of DAC to market that dramatically improves energy, sorbent, and CAPEX inputs to deliver low-cost, high durability CDR. These are exciting times and I’m looking forward to sharing more about Spiritus's progress in the coming months. If you are a CDR buyer or consider yourself CDR curious and want to learn more please shoot me a DM, I’d be more than happy to share updates on what we’re working on at Spiritus or answer questions about the #VCM.

🌍 We often talk about scaling investment into NbS—but what does it actually take? It takes a village. I recently returned from a two-week field mission in Tanzania, where we worked directly with project and community partners advancing their NbS program, on behalf of INTEGRITY GLOBAL PARTNERS INC. Many of the most credible and impactful projects are struggling to access early-stage capital. This “valley of death” exists because there is little to no revenue in the early years—trees take time to grow, and carbon credits take time to issue. While developers often bring deep implementation expertise, they may not speak "finance". As a result, project finance is increasingly skewed toward developers who do—even when they lack meaningful on-the-ground experience or long-term community partnerships. The project we visited underscores this challenge: a complex, multi-component initiative spanning government, communal, and private lands, combining different carbon methodologies across a large and dynamic landscape. It is technically sophisticated, jurisdictionally layered, and logistically demanding—the bumpy dirt roads seem to go on forever! Yet with an incredibly smart and dedicated team behind it, the project holds exceptional potential for climate, biodiversity conservation, and livelihood impacts. To bridge the gap between investor expectations and project realities, we took a deeply collaborative approach: 🔹 Week 1: Field visits to assess risks—technical, financial, regulatory, executional—not by checking boxes, but by working hand-in-hand with partners to identify those risks and practical mitigation strategies. We can do this because we have deep expertise across these multi-disciplines. We were told repeatedly that it was a relief to be able to speak openly about challenges with a partner invested in solving them. 🔹 Week 2: A multi-day capacity-building workshop focused on carbon markets, and carbon and commercial finance. Our goal: equip partners with the knowledge and tools to evaluate options, financial terms, engage confidently with investors, and advocate for fair, aligned partnerships. We co-developed actionable risk mitigation plans so that, when investor conversations begin, the project enters with a credible strategy and a clear, well-supported voice. Yes, this takes time and effort. But if we’re serious about channeling capital into high-impact NbS projects, this is the kind of work that’s needed. We must move beyond transactional models—with investors and projects on either side of the table - and start showing up as true partners. #NatureBasedSolutions #ClimateFinance #CarbonMarkets #CarbonProjects #IGP

➡️ The 7 Key Success Factors of Realized Floating Projects 🚣 Floating developments hold immense potential for tackling climate challenges like rising sea levels and land scarcity. Yet, many initiatives fail to get off the ground. Why? Lack of stakeholder support, unclear governance, difficulty securing permits, and failure of mobilizing the required expertise are just a few barriers. But some projects succeed—and thrive. Based on 17 years of experience implementing floating projects at Blue21, learning from both successful and unsuccessful examples, and in-depth scientific research, we’ve identified the 7 key success factors that set successful initiatives apart: 1️⃣ Strong Political Support Gain backing from local leaders to create an enabling environment for innovation. 2️⃣ Collaboration Across Sectors Build partnerships with governments, businesses, and researchers to leverage expertise and resources. 3️⃣ Community Involvement Engage citizens early in the process to build trust, secure buy-in, and align with local needs. 4️⃣ Windows of Opportunity Identify and capitalize on key moments, such as global events or crises, to drive momentum. 5️⃣ Alignment with Policy Agendas Tie your project to existing priorities, like climate adaptation or water management goals, to increase receptivity. 6️⃣ Innovation-Led Development Position your project as a pilot or R&D initiative to reduce societal resistance and build stakeholder confidence. 7️⃣ Temporary Character Highlight the flexibility and mobility of floating projects—this often increases the likelihood of securing permits. Success is achievable when technical excellence meets strategic planning, collaboration, and stakeholder alignment. We are sharing these lessons because we are developing a new market together with our friends, partners and colleagues. More successful projects will create a larger market for everyone involved and more positive global impact.

Whether you're a seasoned expert in Nature-based Solutions (NbS) or new to the field, this landmark report is for you. Our amazing team at E Co. has produced "Promoting Nature-based Solutions in the Pacific: Key Insights and Recommendations 2025" for the Pacific Community-SPC. Drawing on analysis of 124 real-world initiatives, it uncovers universal lessons on project design, financing, and long-term success that are essential for practitioners and investors everywhere. For anyone working to finance, design, or de-risk Nature-based Solutions, the report offers crucial lessons. For a powerful visual summary of what's at stake, check out the 'Ridge to Reef' diagrams on page 46 (figure 14). They perfectly illustrate the difference between a degraded and a healthy, resilient ecosystem. Here are a few key takeaways: 💡 Defining the asset: A project isn't a Nature-based Solution just because it involves nature. To be an investable solution, it must be designed to deliver clear social, economic, and cultural benefits that address a specific societal challenge. 💡 Understanding the limits: Nature-based Solutions are not a silver bullet. Knowing when an engineered or hybrid approach is more appropriate is crucial for managing project risk and ensuring credibility with stakeholders. 💡 De-risking through community: Genuine community leadership is non-negotiable for long-term success. Projects driven by local ownership are more sustainable, significantly reducing operational and reputational risk. 💡 Matching finance to ecology: Short-term funding cycles are a critical barrier. The report explores the need for financial models that align with ecological timescales, allowing solutions to mature and deliver lasting returns. This report is packed with detailed sectoral analysis and recommendations relevant to anyone in the climate finance and sustainability space. The full report is below. Dive in and let me know your thoughts, and please repost to your network if they would be interested. Great work Ellie La Trobe-Hogan, Clare Wingfield, Malki Rodrigo, Aurelio Padovezi, Federico G. Riet Sapriza, Michael Ruggeri, Frank Thomalla, and Patricia Tona Katto

✋ The World Bank Group released the report, "Financing Climate Adaptation and Nature-Based Infrastructure" 👉 This report assesses opportunities to increase private sector participation and financing for climate adaptation and nature-based infrastructure in Emerging and Developing Economies (EMDEs) 👉Highlights: 1️⃣ While substantial knowledge exists in relation to technical infrastructure solutions to address climate risks and nature loss, the collective understanding of viable models to catalyze private participation and investment remains nascent 2️⃣ Private sector participation and financing of adaptation and nature-based infrastructure are complicated by the inherently public nature of such infrastructure. 3️⃣ Despite these challenges, the study identified a number of promising case-study examples where private sector participation and financing of climate adaptation and nature-based infrastructure had occurred or was expected to occur. 4️⃣ Comparative review of these case studies showed, first, that all relied on one of four basic models for recovering costs during the operational life of the facility being financed - User pays, Government pays, Land value capture, Climate-related funding 5️⃣ The comparative review also identified four financing models that facilitated the upfront flow of capital into these climate adaptation and nature-based infrastructure projects - Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) with private finance, Capital markets finance, Own-source financing, Public finance, including donor grants 6️⃣ In addition to local circumstances and the creativity of project developers, the scope for cost recovery will also be a function of the wider enabling environment in which the project is being developed. 7️⃣ Therefore, while much can be achieved through innovative project-level solutions, the analysis also points to the importance of regulations, governance, capacity, and data.  8️⃣ In conclusion, a concerted effort is needed to address the financing gap and unlock the potential of private investment in climate adaptation and nature-based infrastructure. 👉 Read the full report for more insights