things to know

Hot rocks, AI, and more — 5 themes and takeaways from CERAWeek 2024 in Houston

Here are five things to know from CERAWeek this year. Photo courtesy of CERAWeek

The 2024 edition of CERAWeek by S&P Global wrapped up last Friday in Houston, and a handful of themes emerged as topical and disruptive amid the energy transition.

Here are five takeaways from the conference, according to EnergyCapital reporting.

Funding the energy transition continues to be a challenge.

Photo courtesy of CERAWeek

The biggest obstacle to the energy transition is — and might always be — funding it. A panel at Agora on Thursday, March 21, moderated by Barbara Burger set out to discuss the role of venture capital amid the future of energy.

Daniel Goldman, managing partner at Clean Energy Ventures, said that the first plants for these new, revolutionary technologies are going to be more expensive than its subsequent plants.

"But you have to built it," Goldman says. "'First of a kind' can be very different from the end plant, because you need to manage risk. ... But those first plants are going to be quite costly, and you're going to have to recognize that as an investor."

Microsoft and Breakthrough Ventures Founder Bill Gates would address this in his talk later that day, pointing out that traditional infrastructure investors are used to knowing what a plant would cost before its built. But in clean tech, outside of solar and wind, there's too much unknown to give the estimation those investors are looking for.

"Nothing's at the maturity level that you can do that," Gates says.

The DOE's role of de-risking green tech.

Photo courtesy of CERAWeek

The United States Department of Energy had a significant presence at CERAWeek, with Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm making two major announcements on Monday, March 18, the first day of the conference. One of the announcements was the DOE's latest Pathways to Commercial Liftoff report, which are initiatives established to provide investors with information of how specific energy technologies commercialize and what challenges they each have to overcome as they scale.

"We develop these Liftoff Reports through a combination of modeling and hundreds and hundreds of interviews with people across the whole investment lifecycle—from early-stage capital to commercial banks and institutional investors," Granholm says in her address, announcing geothermal energy as the subject of the ninth report.

Intended to "create a common fact base and a tool for ongoing dialogue with the private sector on the pathways to commercial liftoff," according to the DOE, these reports can be instrumental for enterprises in the field.

A panel at Agora on Thursday, March 21, featuring geothermal energy innovators discussed the impact of the report. Tim Latimer, CEO and founder of Houston-based Fervo Energy, says the report included details from his company's work.

To Latimer, the report showcases geothermal energy's ability to compete from a cost perspective.

"I think geothermal is already winning that cost discussion," Latimer says. "You're talking about $45 per megawatt hour unsubsidized cost for round-the-clock, 24/7 carbon-free energy. I think that's an achievable ambition the DOE set out, and I think it's an unbeatable value proposition.

Hot topic: Geothermal energy.

Photo courtesy of CERAWeek

Geothermal energy was discussed throughout the week following Granholm's address, in part because of its expected cost efficiency, but also because it's a type of energy that should provide a smooth transition from traditional oil and gas.

John Redfern, CEO of Eavor Technologies, global geothermal technology company headquartered in Canada, says on the geothermal panel that the geothermal industry can build off existing infrastructure.

"Most of it is building blocks that we're recycling from the oil industry — resources, people, technologies," Redfern says. "So, it's more about implementing rather than inventing some new, novel product."

Latimer agrees, adding that Fervo "is fully in the deployment phase."

"The breakthrough needed to make geothermal ready for primetime have already happened," Latimer says.

AI is everywhere — especially the energy transition.

Photo courtesy of CERAWeek

The topic of artificial intelligence was everywhere, so much that by Thursday, panelists joked about every discussion including at least one mention of the technology.

Gates was one speaker who addresses the subject, which isn't all too surprising, since Microsoft owns a portion of OpenAI, which created ChatGPT. One thing left to be known is how directly AI will affect the energy transition — and on what timeline.

AI's current applications are within white collar activities, Gates explains, citing writing a regulatory permit or looking at evidence in a lawsuit. He explains that current AI capabilities could continually grow or remain stagnant for a while, he isn't sure.

"The thing that’s daunting is we don’t know how quickly it will improve," he adds.

Gates didn't comment on energy specific AI applications but noted that AI has advanced far past robotics, which would target blue collar roles.

Big tech sees green.

Photo courtesy of CERAWeek

And speaking of AI, big tech companies have been making moves to lower carbon footprints, and that was made clear by the activations at CERAWeek. Microsoft and Amazon each had designated houses at the conference, alongside Oxy, Chevron, Aramco, and other traditional energy players.

At Microsoft, Houston-based Amperon, which recently announced a partnership with the tech company, presented and pitched their company. The Microsoft and Amazon houses showcased each company's low-carbon technologies.

Trending News

A View From HETI

Greenhouse gases continue to rise, and the challenges they pose are not going away. Photo via Getty Images

For the past 40 years, climate policy has often felt like two steps forward, one step back. Regulations shift with politics, incentives get diluted, and long-term aspirations like net-zero by 2050 seem increasingly out of reach. Yet greenhouse gases continue to rise, and the challenges they pose are not going away.

This matters because the costs are real. Extreme weather is already straining U.S. power grids, damaging homes, and disrupting supply chains. Communities are spending more on recovery while businesses face rising risks to operations and assets. So, how can the U.S. prepare and respond?

The Baker Institute Center for Energy Studies (CES) points to two complementary strategies. First, invest in large-scale public adaptation to protect communities and infrastructure. Second, reframe carbon as a resource, not just a waste stream to be reduced.

Why Focusing on Emissions Alone Falls Short

Peter Hartley argues that decades of global efforts to curb emissions have done little to slow the rise of CO₂. International cooperation is difficult, the costs are felt immediately, and the technologies needed are often expensive. Emissions reduction has been the central policy tool for decades, and it has been neither sufficient nor effective.

One practical response is adaptation, which means preparing for climate impacts we can’t avoid. Some of these measures are private, taken by households or businesses to reduce their own risks, such as farmers shifting crop types, property owners installing fire-resistant materials, or families improving insulation. Others are public goods that require policy action. These include building stronger levees and flood defenses, reinforcing power grids, upgrading water systems, revising building codes, and planning for wildfire risks. Such efforts protect people today while reducing long-term costs, and they work regardless of the source of extreme weather. Adaptation also does not depend on global consensus; each country, state, or city can act in its own interest. Many of these measures even deliver benefits beyond weather resilience, such as stronger infrastructure and improved security against broader threats.

McKinsey research reinforces this logic. Without a rapid scale-up of climate adaptation, the U.S. will face serious socioeconomic risks. These include damage to infrastructure and property from storms, floods, and heat waves, as well as greater stress on vulnerable populations and disrupted supply chains.

Making Carbon Work for Us

While adaptation addresses immediate risks, Ken Medlock points to a longer-term opportunity: turning carbon into value.

Carbon can serve as a building block for advanced materials in construction, transportation, power transmission, and agriculture. Biochar to improve soils, carbon composites for stronger and lighter products, and next-generation fuels are all examples. As Ken points out, carbon-to-value strategies can extend into construction and infrastructure. Beyond creating new markets, carbon conversion could deliver lighter and more resilient materials, helping the U.S. build infrastructure that is stronger, longer-lasting, and better able to withstand climate stress.

A carbon-to-value economy can help the U.S. strengthen its manufacturing base and position itself as a global supplier of advanced materials.

These solutions are not yet economic at scale, but smart policies can change that. Expanding the 45Q tax credit to cover carbon use in materials, funding research at DOE labs and universities, and supporting early markets would help create the conditions for growth.

Conclusion

Instead of choosing between “doing nothing” and “net zero at any cost,” we need a third approach that invests in both climate resilience and carbon conversion.

Public adaptation strengthens and improves the infrastructure we rely on every day, including levees, power grids, water systems, and building standards that protect communities from climate shocks. Carbon-to-value strategies can complement these efforts by creating lighter, more resilient carbon-based infrastructure.

CES suggests this combination is a pragmatic way forward. As Peter emphasizes, adaptation works because it is in each nation’s self-interest. And as Ken reminds us, “The U.S. has a comparative advantage in carbon. Leveraging it to its fullest extent puts the U.S. in a position of strength now and well into the future.”

-----------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn.

Trending News