Why this investor doesn’t back companies that use carbon offsets
Zachary Bogue, co-managing partner for Data Collective LLC, speaks during the Future of Innovation: Spotlight on Artificial Intelligence Conference in San Francisco, California, U.S., on Thursday, June 22, 2017. The market for AI technologies is estimated to generate more than $60 billion in productivity improvements for U.S. businesses annually.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
The Silicon Valley venture capital firm DCVC invests in all kinds of climate tech companies including geothermal power, aerial methane imaging, advanced nuclear fission reactors, fabrics made out of mycelium, wastewater filtration technology — to name a few.
But there is one category of the climate tech landscape that Zack Bogue, a co-founder of DCVC does not invest in: Carbon offsets.
“We really don’t underwrite or like to see companies that are using carbon offsets,” Bogue told CNBC in an interview at the end of September in an interview in the Palo Alto office. “We do not look at companies that need to use carbon offsets to make their business model work.”
A carbon offset is a certificate or voucher that a company or organization buys that represents the reduction of a metric ton, or 2,205 pounds, of carbon dioxide emissions. If a company or organization is unable to eliminate the release of greenhouse gasses in their operations, they may purchase a carbon offset to compensate for their emissions.
“There’s been some studies out there that up to 90% of carbon offsets are completely ineffective — have had no impact — which is a tragedy of our time, because big Fortune 500 companies are paying millions of dollars to these carbon offsets, and continuing to emit in the meantime,” Bogue told CNBC. “And these offsets are actually having zero impact.”
The effectiveness of a carbon offset is a contentious issue, but at least one white paper published in April 2021 from the Finnish nonprofit and startup Compensate found that 90 percent of carbon capture projects were ineffective. Compensate has both a non-profit advocacy arm and a company that sells what it deems to be high quality carbon offsets. For the white paper, Compensate analyzed more than 100 nature-based carbon offsets certified by third-party verifiers in the space.
Of the carbon offsets which Compensate deemed a failure, 52% were guilty of what Compensate called “additionality” — for instance, offset credits sold to protect trees that were never in any danger of being cut down. Another 16% of the projects Compensate analyzed were considered a failure because their permanence was considered in jeopardy. For example, coastal restoration projects for mangroves in Bangladesh were jeopardized when floods devastated the country, Compensate said.
So, too, said Bogue of local California projects.
“There were some forests north of here that were the subject of carbon offsets where someone paid millions of dollars to not cut the forest down and — whether or not that’s legitimate, we can leave that aside — because those forests burned down,” Bogue said. “So they actually released the carbon that the company was paying to not have released and that the company emitted.”
DCVC does not invest in companies that use carbon offsets right now, but that is not an indictment against the idea.
“To be clear, I want I want them to exist,” Bogue told CNBC. “I want there to be a carbon tax, I want carbon credits, carbon offsets.”
But there isn’t enough transparency or accountability in the industry, Bogue said. To properly stand up the industry, there would need to be an agency akin to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), according to Bogue.
“There’s a very set and rigorous process that you need to do to take a molecule from discovery and up until you’re dosing a human with it: You need to prove that it’s effective, you need to prove it’s non toxic,” Bogue said. “I would say that the imperative to reducing CO2 is as high of a human health imperative as putting small molecules into our body. Full stop.”
Until then, the industry is too uncertain to be a safe place for the money that DCVC invests on behalf of its limited partners, which are the likes of college endowments and hospitals.
“It needs to be rigorous, and apples to apples and, and verifiable and documentable,” Bogue said. “That’s just not where it is today. That’s where we need to get to, but that’s also why don’t think it’s investable.”
The UAW union’s Stellantis Council met yesterday to discuss the beleaguered carmaker’s “ongoing failure” to honor the agreement that ended the 2023 labor strike, and their latest union memo doesn’t pull many punches.
It’s not a great time to be Stellantis. Its dealers are suing leadership and threatening to oust the company’s controversial CEO, Carlos Tavares, as sales continue to crater in North America, it can’t move its new, high-profile electric Fiat, and it’s first luxury electric Jeep isn’t ready. And now, things are about to get bad.
In an email sent out by the UAW earlier today (received at 4:55PM CST), UAW President Shawn Fain wrote, “For years, the company picked us off plant-by-plant and we lacked the will and the means to fight back. Today is different. Because we stood together and demanded the right to strike over job security—product commitment—we have the tools to fight back and win … We unanimously recommend to the membership that every UAW worker at Stellantis prepare for a fight, and we all get ready to vote YES to authorize a strike at Stellantis.”
The dispute seems to stem from Stellantis’ inability to commit to new product (and continued employment) at its UAW-run plants and other failings to meet its strike-ending obligations. This, despite a €3 billion stock buyback executed in late 2023.
I’ve included the memo, in its entirety, below. Take a look for yourself, and let us know what you think of the UAW’s call for action in the comments.
UAW memo
SOURCE: UAW, via email.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
![Kia EV9 GT caught with an active spoiler for the first time [Video]](https://i0.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2024/09/Kia-EV9-GT-active-spoiler.jpeg?resize=1200,628&quality=82&strip=all&ssl=1)
Kia promises the new EV9 GT will have “enormous power,” but that’s not all. For the first time, the Kia EV9 GT was caught with an active spoiler, giving us a sneak peek at potential new upgrades.
The brand’s first three-row electric SUV is already making its presence known in the US, helping push Kia to back-to-back record sales months. Meanwhile, a more powerful, sporty variant is on the way.
Kia confirmed the EV9 GT will top off the electric SUV’s lineup in April. Packing “enormous power,” the high-performance GT model can accelerate from 0 to 62 mph (0 to 100 km/h) in 4 secs.
With a “high-output” dual-motor (AWD) system, the EV9 GT can quickly pick up speed despite weighing over 5,000 lbs.
Kia also equipped it with other high-performance features, such as a reinforced suspension and electronic braking system, for better control and stability.
We’ve already caught a glimpse of the performance electric SUV out testing, revealing aggressive new bumpers and wheels. Now, a new design feature has been spotted.
Kia EV9 GT could come with an active rear spoiler
The latest video from HealerTV shows the EV9 GT with what appears to be an active spoiler. As the reporter noted, it could be similar to the one spotted on the Genesis GV70 Magma.
Tesla’s Model X also used to come with an active spoiler until it was dropped a few years back. Although the GT model was spotted with one, Kia could just be testing new features, so don’t get too excited yet.
Earlier this week, a video from HealerTV showed the front row of the EV9 GT, comparing it to the current GT-Line model.
Several differences can be immediately noticed, including a more aggressive, all-black design with a yellow stripe down the center of the seat.
Kia is set to launch the EV9 GT in early 2025. It will rival other performance SUVs like the Tesla Model X Plaid.
Although prices have yet to be confirmed, the GT model is expected to sit above the current GT-Line at $73,900. In comparison, Tesla’s Model X Plaid starts at $94,990 and can sprint from 0 to 60 mph in 2.5 secs.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Consumer Reports and EV charging app Chargeway are working together to give drivers a better way to rate public chargers, report uptime, and address maintenance issues.
The Chargeway app is best known for its use of numbers and colors to simplify the complexity of multiple charge ports and different charging speeds for new EV drivers. The app also enables Chargeway users to rate and review the public charging stations they visit – and now, those ratings can show up on Consumer Reports.
The technical collaboration with Chargeway is part of a larger effort called the EV Charging Community, which engages with a number of different EV advocacy groups including Plug In America, GreenLatinos, and Generation 180, and leverages the mobile app to rate public EV charging experiences based on various factors, with the findings reported back to industry stakeholders like EVSE manufacturers, CPOs, and utilities.
Be heard
“We are very excited to be partnering with Consumer Reports,” says Chargeway founder, Matt Teske. “From day one, Chargeway has focused on a driver first app design to provide easier EV charging experiences as well as transparency for what drivers can anticipate at (the) station they choose … we share Consumer Reports’ goal to give drivers a voice in the public EV charging reliability conversation. Now, instead of posting complaints on social media and feeling ignored, EV drivers can use the Chargeway mobile app to provide their feedback to the leading consumer advocacy organization.”
Consumer Reports says it’s already seen nearly a third of its 1,600 enrolled community members experience a problem with public charging, so it’s a real problem. “Charging stations are critical services, but when they’re out of order or barely functional, it wastes consumers’ valuable time,” explains Drew Toher, Consumer Reports’ sustainability campaign manager.
Consumer Reports points out that EV drivers who don’t use Chargeway can also enroll to be part of the community at this link.
Electrek’s Take
Chargeway founder Matt Teske is an old friend. He’s a good friend, too, so it’s great to see his top-shelf EV charging app starting to get some of the recognition it deserves. The CR tie-up and added visibility these ratings will give to industry stakeholders are only going to make things better for EV drivers everywhere.
That up there? That’s one of my early interview episodes of Quick Charge featuring a walkthrough of Chargeway+, another collab between Matt and Austin Energy. Enjoy!
SOURCE | IMAGES: Chargeway, Consumer Reports.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports6 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports11 months agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway