Energy leaders will discuss AI in energy, climate venture funding and the evolving energy workforce at the first-ever TEX-E Conference on Tuesday, April 15, at the Ion. Photo via the Ion

The Texas Exchange for Energy & Climate Entrepreneurship will host its inaugural TEX-E Conference on Tuesday, April 15, at the Ion.

The half-day event will bring together industry leaders, students, researchers, and others for panels and discussions centered around the theme of Energy & Entrepreneurship: Navigating the Future of Climate Tech. Topics will include AI in energy, climate venture funding and the evolving energy workforce. Bobby Tudor, CEO of Artemis Energy Partners, is slated to present the keynote.

A networking happy hour and an interactive trivia session are also on the lineup.

Here is the full schedule of events:

1:15 p.m. — Keynote Address: Fueling the Future: Balancing Energy Demands with Net Zero Solutions

  • Bobby Tudor, CEO of Artemis Energy Partners

1:50 p.m. — Emerging Technologies & AI in Energy

  • Rob Schapiro, Senior Director, Energy Partnerships, Microsoft
  • Prakash Seshadri, SBP of Engineering, Electrification Software, GE Vernova
  • Birlie Bourgeois, Director, Shale and Tight Asset Class, Chevron

Moderated by Timothy Butts, TEB Tech

2:30 p.m. — Break

2:40 p.m. — The Climate Capitalists: Funding the Next Generation

  • Neal Dikeman, Partner, Energy Transition Ventures
  • Eric Rubenstein, Founding Managing Partner, New Climate Ventures
  • Jim Gable, President, Chevron Technology Ventures
  • Juliana Garaizar, Venture Partner, ClimaTech Global Ventures

Moderated by Adam Ali, TEX-E Fellow

3:20 p.m. — Interactive Trivia Session

3:30 p.m. — The Talent Transition: Navigating Energy Careers in a Changing World

  • Gin Kinney, Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer, NRG
  • Loretta Williams Gurnell, SUPERGirls SHINE Foundation

4:10 p.m. — Closing Remarks

4:30-6:30 p.m. – Brewing Innovation Mixer at Second Draught


TEX-E launched in 2022 in collaboration with Greentown Labs, MIT’s Martin Trust Center for Entrepreneurship, and five university partners — Rice University, Texas A&M University, Prairie View A&M University, University of Houston, and The University of Texas at Austin. It's known for its student track within the Energy Venture Day and Pitch Competition at CERAWeek, which awarded $25,000 to HEXASpec, a Rice University-led team, earlier this year.

Houston-based Oxy and Woodside Energy sponsor the TEX-E Conference. Register here.

Energy founders — when you feel the market starting to tighten up, consider giving yourself, and your investors, some breathing space, then use that breathing space to drive value. Photo via Getty Images

Houston energy investor: How to build startup runway in a choppy venture funding market

guest column

The venture funding market in 2023 has been very tough.

The number of rounds closing is significantly down from the 2022, and a record number of companies are raising. Overall VC fundraising is down, but great deals are getting funded well and at good valuations, while many are struggling. Fewer new investors are writing lead checks and being more cautious when they do, later stage investors are shifting earlier stage to manage risk, bad cap tables, operating plans, and reluctant insiders are killing otherwise good deals, and everyone is working on ensuring their portfolio is in good shape.

This is just another venture cycle. The sky is not falling, the playbook for this cycle was written long ago. But if you are a founder, you may need to take action. If you are less than 15 months of runway, it’s time to go to your investors with a plan. You need to either be well on your way to closing a round, starting your fundraise if the company is ready, know your investor group’s plan to bridge or do an inside round if necessary and what you need to achieve to unlock that, or bring them a realistic plan yourself to get to 18 to 30 months of runway. But whatever you need to do, you need to do it now.

The runway plan

The core of a good runway plan is building a cash wedge by taking a little from everywhere, and drop margin and cash. A little revenues, a little in pricing, a little headcount reduction, a little insider capital, a little new capital, and a little balance sheet help. How much a little is, depends on your own dynamic. The secret to a good cash wedge runway plan is starting early, and doing it now. Every day of delay increases the depth of the changes needed for the same runway – until you reach a point where the brutal burn math just doesn’t work, and the changes become costly or even untenable.

Focus on your customers. Nothing cures runway or fundraising ills like revenue. You’ve built these relationships for a reason. They are taking your calls because they care. If you and your team aren’t spending most of your time with customers right now, you are doing it wrong. Good customers get it. Focus their attention on how your product makes them money, and how much. Support their internal efforts to grow the account. Open book it, raise prices if it makes sense, and ask for more volume or contract extensions at good prices if you can’t. With new customers, focus on getting more phase ones that fit in the budget your champions have available quickly. Bet you and your customer can find more budget later when you’ve demonstrated value to them. Bid every grant and non-dilutive source that makes sense, which builds leverage for yourself and your investors.

Burn matters. In a tight market, no one likes to buy burn, and demonstrating efficiency of revenue and backlog relative to capitalization and burn level matters. If you’re going to cut (and you probably should), cut much deeper than you think, and do it now. You ran this company when it was four people and no money, you can do it again if you really had to. Start making quick decisions about what you can defer and cut in the near term, there is always an easy 5 to 10 percent of costs you can cut and push to next year, and often a few points that can be pulled from supply chain deals. Overplan for growth, but don’t release to spend until your capital markets plan is clear.

Rebalance your spend. Shift your cost structure and organization chart forward towards the customer. Aggressively expand customer facing lead generation, guerilla marketing, applications engineering and direct sales efforts, at the expense of internally facing ones like R&D, manufacturing, and overhead. Repurpose people, change comp structures, job descriptions, or adjust costs and headcount. Get your team on board with the focus and where your runway is. A 12-person startup has about 2,000 labor hours a month to throw at its problems, 3,000 hours on overdrive, when your runway shortens, it’s time to hurl those at customers. Keep in mind, none of this is permanent, good startup organizations are elastic and in six months you can shift back or add again. You’re only really making 180-day changes here. That’s what the nimble startup means. It’s about runway and quick product and operational shifts.

Hit the balance sheet for cash. Depending on company stage and type, sell any underutilized assets and inventory, defer some capex, put someone on collecting AR and adjust your contract terms and pricing to pull forward cash flow, term out and negotiate payment terms on AP, leases and debt. One huge caveat. Do not take venture debt. Until you are profitable, venture debt does not actually create the runway in the real world that you see on paper, and has killed more good startups on the cusp of greatness. Venture debt is Lucy, runway is the football, and you are Charlie Brown.

Adjust your capital markets strategy. The classic rule is raise all you can when you can, because capital is available most when you need it least. But that’s not the whole story. And founders need to realize it is really dangerous to take a deal to market that is not ready, and doesn’t have the right level of insider support, is priced or structured wrong. While the market sets the price and terms, once you’ve a cap table full of investors, both new and existing investor appetite, and valuation, becomes a partial function of existing and new investor appetite and support. Take out a deal that’s not ready, or with too much burn, too little insider support, too high a last valuation, too large a convert or safe overhang or prior capitalization, too little team ownership, or too much valuation or cash need relative to its team, technology, TAM and traction (and cap table), and a founder and board can turn a good opportunity into a death spiral headed straight off a cliff, fast.

The "Magical 25" percent ratio. This is an art not a science, but the Magical 25 percent ratio on a prototypical startup will give you an idea of how powerful a Runaway Plan can be to get a deal done and reset a founder’s opportunity.

Imagine a middle of the road seed funded SaaS startup, burning $350,000 gross, with $100,000 in MRR, which has raised $3 million in cash from three investors and spent half of it. On its current trajectory it has six months of cash left, and is bankrupt by March. Market turned down, and the initial investor calls don’t result in a lead VC leaning in. The logic of burn rate math is brutal. In 90 days the company is on fumes, and it has no term sheet in hand, with the odds of getting one generally falling. And in today’s market the $1 million in ARR has become the new minimum not sufficient condition for fundraising, and the company will need to get farther on it’s A to be attractive to a B round investor. If the founder does nothing and waits 90 days they’ll be begging their investors for a bridge, and begging new investors for a flat round, and will likely end up with downround or an ugly insider bridge. At $250,000-a-month burn and no term sheet, within 150 days the founder will then need an inside round of between $4.5 and $6 million to get to the prototypical 24 month runway, or a $1.5 to $2 million bridge to buy enough more months to fundraise and build value. That’s 1.5x to 2x the capital raised, or over half the existing capital in a bridge, and puts intense pressure on strength of your cap table, growth rate, broad insider support, and quality of revenues in a tight venture funding market.

If the founder instead cuts costs 25 percent immediately, and then throws all hands on deck to find 25 percent more revenue — at this level of burn the startup probably has a team of at least 12 to 15 people, meaning the founder can throw at least 2,000-3,000 man hours in an all hands customer push in just the next 30 days if they had to. At the same time, the founder goes to his largest investors, walks through the cash and cost plan, and asks them to give him a term sheet for a seed extension with existing investors all kicking in 25 percent of their contribution to date, with the extension equal to 25 percent of the total capital at close. It can be papered fast and cheap. That adds $750,000, leaving the founder to find one new investor to join the insiders at the last price for 25 percent of the extension – a much easier ask of a new investor in a tough market, and probably one the founder has a couple of interested parties that have been watching, or certainly one of the founder’s investors can make a quick call to a friend to close. Brutal burn rate math has now become magical burn rate math and the company has 18 months of runway, has halved its net burn, and can additionally get away with half the A round equal to 1x the capital it has raised to date at the end of it if need be.

The "magical" part is the founder has now changed the odds for everyone – his team only has to find 25 percent revenues and costs. His insiders are only asked for 25 cents on the dollar support at a price they should love, leaving the typical fund with plenty of follow-on reserves after that, a new investor does not have to carry the lion share of the burn, set price, do as much dd, or worry about investor fatigue, and the insiders don’t have to go it alone and have external validation, and the founder has minimized their dilution, and their fundraising time. If the founder then is able to keep costs flat for just 6 months in a sprint and pick up another 25 percent in revenues, the runway at the current cashout date is still 16 months, and the company is set up well for its next round, with on $4 million in capitalization on nearly $2 million in ARR, a new investor with dry powder in the deal, and plenty of reserves left on the cap table to support the A, with a lot more traction – leaving the size of A round the company has to have at less than half the level of before, the effective revenue multiple insiders and new investors are facing halved, the burn the new investor had to buy halved and lots of time and options for the founder to drive value, dilution, and scale.

Founders, it’s your company. Your decision. Just be aware, how and how fast you play the tough decisions when the market shifts, changes the calculus for your investors, and their level of confidence and ammunition to back your future decisions. When you feel the market starting to tighten up, consider giving yourself, and your investors, some breathing space, then use that breathing space to drive value.

———

Neal Dikeman is a venture capitalist and seven-time startup co-founder investing out of Energy Transition Ventures. This article originally ran on InnovationMap.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

ExxonMobil may delay or cancel plans for $7 billion Baytown hydrogen plant

project uncertainty

Spring-based ExxonMobil, the country’s largest oil and gas company, might delay or cancel what would be the world’s largest low-carbon hydrogen plant due to a significant change in federal law. The project carries a $7 billion price tag.

The Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act created a new 10-year incentive, the 45V tax credit, for production of clean hydrogen. But under President Trump’s "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," the window for starting construction of low-carbon hydrogen projects that qualify for the tax credit has narrowed. The Inflation Reduction Act mandated that construction start by 2033. But the Big Beautiful Bill switched the construction start time to early 2028.

“While our project can meet this timeline, we’re concerned about the development of a broader market, which is critical to transition from government incentives,” ExxonMobil Chairman and CEO Darren Woods said during the company’s recent second-quarter earnings call.

Woods said ExxonMobil is working to determine whether a combination of the 45Q tax credit for carbon capture projects and the revised 45V tax credit will help pave the way for a “broader” low-carbon hydrogen market.

“If we can’t see an eventual path to a market-driven business, we won’t move forward with the [Baytown] project,” Woods said.

“We knew that helping to establish a brand-new product and a brand-new market initially driven by government policy would not be easy or advance in a straight line,” he added.

Woods said ExxonMobil is trying to nail down sales contracts connected to the project, including exports of ammonia to Asia and Europe and sales of hydrogen in the U.S.

ExxonMobil announced in 2022 that it would build the low-carbon hydrogen plant at its refining and petrochemical complex in Baytown. The company has said the plant is slated to go online in 2027 and 2028.

As it stands now, ExxonMobil wants the Baytown plant to produce up to 1 billion cubic feet of hydrogen per day made from natural gas, and capture and store more than 98 percent of the associated carbon dioxide. The company has said the project could store as much as 10 million metric tons of CO2 per year.

EPA scraps $7B solar program, stripping Texas of hundreds of millions in clean energy funds

funding cut

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is ending a $7 billion Biden-era program that was supposed to enable low-income Americans to access affordable solar power. The program, which EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin called a “boondoggle,” would have benefited more than 900,000 U.S. households.

In line with the EPA’s action, the Lone Star State is losing a $249.7 million grant awarded last year to the Harris County-led Texas Solar for All Coalition. The grant money would have equipped more than 46,000 low-income and disadvantaged communities and households in Texas with residential solar power. The nonprofit Solar United Neighbors organization said Texas had already begun to roll out this initiative.

Also slipping out of Texas’ hands are:

  • A more than $156 million 19-state grant awarded to the Clean Energy Fund of Texas in partnership with the Bullard Center for Environmental and Climate Justice at Houston’s Texas Southern University. The Clean Energy Fund is a Houston-based “green bank” that backs investments in solar and wind power.
  • Part of a $249.3 million multistate grant awarded to the Community Power Coalition’s Powering America Together Program. The nonprofit Inclusive Prosperity Capital organization leads the coalition.
  • Part of a $249.8 million multistate grant awarded to the Solar Access for Nationwide Affordable Housing Program, led by the nonprofit GRID Alternatives organization.

In a post on the X social media platform, Zeldin said the recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill” killed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which would have financed the $7 billion Solar for All program.

“The bottom line is this: EPA no longer has the statutory authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds to keep this boondoggle alive,” Zeldin said.

Anya Schoolman, executive director of Washington, D.C.-based Solar United Neighbors, accused the EPA of illegally terminating the Solar for All program. She said ending the program “harms families struggling with rising energy costs and will cost us good local jobs.”

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, joined Schoolman in alleging the EPA’s “outrageous” action is illegal. Sanders introduced the legislation that established the Solar for All program.

The senator lashed out at President Trump for axing the program in order “to protect the obscene profits of his friends in the oil and gas industry.”

New UH white paper details Texas grid's shortfalls

grid warning

Two University of Houston researchers are issuing a warning about the Texas power grid: Its current infrastructure falls short of what’s needed to keep pace with rising demand for electricity.

The warning comes in a new whitepaper authored by Ramanan Krishnamoorti, vice president of energy and innovation at UH, and researcher Aparajita Datta, a Ph.D candidate at UH.

“As data centers pop up around the Lone Star State, electric vehicles become more commonplace, industries adopt decarbonization technologies, demographics change, and temperatures rise statewide, electricity needs in Texas could double by 2035,” a UH news release says. “If electrification continues to grow unconstrained, demand could even quadruple over the next decade.”

Without significant upgrades to power plants and supporting infrastructure, Texas could see electricity shortages, rising power costs and more stress on the state’s grid in coming years, the researchers say. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) grid serves 90 percent of the state.

“Texas, like much of the nation, has fallen behind on infrastructure updates, and the state’s growing population, diversified economy and frequent severe weather events are increasing the strain on the grid,” Datta says. “Texas must improve its grid to ensure people in the state have access to reliable, affordable, and resilient energy systems so we can preserve and grow the quality of life in the state.”

The whitepaper’s authors caution that Texas faces a potential electricity shortfall of up to 40 gigawatts annually by 2035 if the grid doesn’t expand, with a more probable shortfall of about 27 gigawatts. And they allude to a repeat of the massive power outages in Texas during Winter Storm Uri in February 2021.

One gigawatt of electricity can power an estimated 750,000 homes in Texas, according to the Texas Solar + Storage Association.

The state’s current energy mix includes 40 percent natural gas, 29 percent wind, 12 percent coal, 10 percent nuclear and eight percent solar, the authors say.

Despite surging demand, 360 gigawatts of solar and battery storage projects are stuck in ERCOT’s queue, according to the researchers, and new natural gas plants have been delayed or withdrawn due to supply chain challenges, bureaucratic delays, policy uncertainties and shifting financial incentives.

Senate Bill 6, recently signed by Gov. Greg Abbott, calls for demand-response mandates, clearer rate structures and new load management requirements for big users of power like data centers and AI hubs.

“While these provisions are a step in the right direction,” says Datta, “Texas needs more responsive and prompt policy action to secure grid reliability, address the geographic mismatch between electricity demand and supply centers, and maintain the state’s global leadership in energy.”