Sustainability investor addresses startup challenges, Houston's capital shortages, and more

Q&A

Josh Posamentier, co-founder and managing partner at Congruent Ventures, will join Venture Houston as a speaker this year. Photo via congruentvc.com

It's been a challenging year for venture capital, but how are climatetech startups doing specifically? One Bay Area investor shares his point of view on this this topic ahead of Venture Houston next week.

Joshua Posamentier, co-founder and managing partner of Congruent Ventures, a San Francisco-based firm that invests in early-stage sustainable companies, is taking the stage at Venture Houston on September 7. Among others, Posamentier will be in conversation with the founder of one of his firm's portfolio companies, Fervo Energy, discussing seed and early-stage funding for sustainability-focused startups.

Venture Houston is presented by HX Venture Fund, a fund of funds that deploys capital into non-Houston firms to encourage investment in local startups. This year's theme is "Spotlighting the path for decarbonization in a digital world."

Posamentier, who has worked over a decade in this space, shares some of his thoughts on Houston as an energy transition leader, the challenges climate-tech startups face, and more in an interview with EnergyCapital.

EnergyCapital: How do you see Houston and its role in this energy transition, its challenges, its opportunities, etc.?

Josh Posamentier: I actually tend to disagree with the people that say Houston is too far down the oil and gas path. I mean, it's it's capitalism at the end of the day. There's money to be made in in climate mitigation technologies. People are going to go chase it, and I think Houston, of all places, is a pretty capitalistic city. And people are definitely not shy about chasing the next big opportunity. I mean, it was oil and natural gas before, and now it's now it's alternative energy. And so I think from that perspective, it's fine. There's a lot of money.

I think the biggest challenge is honestly, especially on a perception basis, a lot of the policy and social stuff that's endemic to Texas, which is a bummer. I mean, especially for younger talent. Austin had a shine, but I think that's largely gone and Houston never had it. So, I think it's something that needs to be overcome and needs to be thought about at a state level basis, especially if you're going to want to attract young entrepreneurial talent.

EC: What are some of the challenges energy transition startups are facing these days? How is your fund kind of supporting your portfolio companies through these challenges?

JP: There's some normalization that's had to happen over the last 9 to 12 months. As you know, corrections have come down the pipe in the venture ecosystem. By all accounts, it has been really frothy for the last few years, especially so in parts of climate. Some of that's due to the the proliferation of investment from non climate-specific firms. And it's, in many ways, decoupled from the ups and downs of different parts of the venture ecosystem, but it also has different timelines. I think not everyone always appreciates what that means and what that implies for for startups. So there's a lot of frustration and a lot of missed expectations in the early stage part of the ecosystem that are slowly getting fixed. I think getting expectations more in line with reality is going to help immensely.

The other thing is just figuring out how to talk more in a language that venture investors understand. I think that's a little bit of a challenge. There's there's actually a pretty big gap between if you're an oil and gas developer and thinking about how you fund that kind of a business versus how you fund a technology-enabling business. Fervo Energy is an interesting example. It's a tech company, but now it's really a tech enabled developer because they have no choice but to do that full stack. They went to school out here. They understand the ecosystem. They've really taken the effort to really understand all the capital players. And so we're waiting to see how that ultimately plays out.

But there's just different capital. I think it is a little challenging. And this is a good thing. There does need to be a way, I think, to just get people more exposure to to the market there — in the Houston market specifically. If you're spinning at Stanford, there are hundreds of VCs within walking distance. In Houston, the ones I know I can count on one hand.

EC: Has that pace of commercialization changed over the years or have founders found ways to survive that valley of death?

JP: I don't think anything's really changed fundamentally. I think people have gotten a little more clever about understanding how the adoption occurs, and figuring out how to phase into those processes that that comes with experience. But there's only so much acceleration you can do when you're dealing with critical infrastructure. You know, people are not going to want to just jump right in, rip out, and replace things that keep the lights on. And so you just have to figure out how to how to capitalize a business in such a way that you can you can live with those kinds of timelines. Venture capital is a fantastic tool, and it is far from the right tool for every problem. And so there are plenty of opportunities to deploy other tools that are more appropriate to different kinds of different kinds of challenges.

EC: What attracted you to investing in Fervo Energy?

JP: So, it's how we think about portfolio construction. Fervo has an amazing team, which we will bend a lot of rules for, and we saw this opportunity as something they could build a ton of value by validating the tech, establishing a huge land position, and then raising different kinds of capital for the out years and for the project development. A bunch of our companies took venture capital to develop a technology, and then they know that venture is not the right class of capital to then scale that throughout the world and whatever. So they would basically raise other forms of capital in the out years to deploy the technologies.

EC: And one of those options is government funding. How do your portfolio companies utilize that?

JP: A big chunk of our portfolio has some government money, even if it's very early stage research grants or something like that. I see government money being the most effective in a couple of ways. One way obviously is to get the core research out of it versus just spin it into something more commercial that we can all then look at.

The other place that is really exciting is in is getting technologies to scale where they're then cost effective without further subsidies. When we underwrite companies, we are very explicitly underwriting them in the absence of subsidies at scale. The assumption is those are just there to basically bridge the gap between "this is totally uneconomic because it's a tiny, tiny little factory or something" versus "it would be plenty economic if it were a big factory." So, if they can just bridge that gap with a little bit of government money.

We've been through this this cycle a couple of times, and we can't in good faith underwrite anything assuming that government subsidies are going to continue. We very much believe it's a bridge — it's got to be a bridge to something. It can't be a bridge to nowhere. And I think there are a lot of companies out there today that are almost designed to just pump the government incentives, and that's not a recipe for a business that can grow on its own over time.

------

This conversation has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Ad Placement 300x100

Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

How Planckton Data is building the sustainability label every industry will need

now streaming

There’s a reason “carbon footprint” became a buzzword. It sounds like something we should know. Something we should measure. Something that should be printed next to the calorie count on a label.

But unlike calories, a carbon footprint isn’t universal, standardized, or easy to calculate. In fact, for most companies—especially in energy and heavy industry—it’s still a black box.

That’s the problem Planckton Data is solving.

On this episode of the Energy Tech Startups Podcast, Planckton Data co-founders Robin Goswami and Sandeep Roy sit down to explain how they’re turning complex, inconsistent, and often incomplete emissions data into usable insight. Not for PR. Not for green washing. For real operational and regulatory decisions.

And they’re doing it in a way that turns sustainability from a compliance burden into a competitive advantage.

From calories to carbon: The label analogy that actually works

If you’ve ever picked up two snack bars and compared their calorie counts, you’ve made a decision based on transparency. Robin and Sandeep want that same kind of clarity for industrial products.

Whether it’s a shampoo bottle, a plastic feedstock, or a specialty chemical—there’s now consumer and regulatory pressure to know exactly how sustainable a product is. And to report it.

But that’s where the simplicity ends.

Because unlike food labels, carbon labels can’t be standardized across a single factory. They depend on where and how a product was made, what inputs were used, how far it traveled, and what method was used to calculate the data.

Even two otherwise identical chemicals—one sourced from a refinery in Texas and the other in Europe—can carry very different carbon footprints, depending on logistics, local emission factors, and energy sources.

Planckton’s solution is built to handle exactly this level of complexity.

AI that doesn’t just analyze

For most companies, supply chain emissions data is scattered, outdated, and full of gaps.

That’s where Planckton’s use of AI becomes transformative.

It standardizes data from multiple suppliers, geographies, and formats.
It uses probabilistic models to fill in the blanks when suppliers don’t provide details.
It applies industry-specific product category rules (PCRs) and aligns them with evolving global frameworks like ISO standards and GHG Protocol.
It helps companies model decarbonization pathways, not just calculate baselines.

This isn’t generative AI for show. It’s applied machine learning with a purpose: helping large industrial players move from reporting to real action.

And it’s not a side tool. For many of Planckton’s clients, it’s becoming the foundation of their sustainability strategy.

From boardrooms to smokestacks: Where the pressure is coming from

Planckton isn’t just chasing early adopters. They’re helping midstream and upstream industrial suppliers respond to pressure coming from two directions:

Downstream consumer brands—especially in cosmetics, retail, and CPG—are demanding footprint data from every input supplier.
Upstream regulations—especially in Europe—are introducing reporting requirements, carbon taxes, and supply chain disclosure laws.

The team gave a real-world example: a shampoo brand wants to differentiate based on lower emissions. That pressure flows up the value chain to the chemical suppliers. Who, in turn, must track data back to their own suppliers.

It’s a game of carbon traceability—and Planckton helps make it possible.

Why Planckton focused on chemicals first

With backgrounds at Infosys and McKinsey, Robin and Sandeep know how to navigate large-scale digital transformations. They also know that industry specificity matters—especially in sustainability.

So they chose to focus first on the chemicals sector—a space where:

Supply chains are complex and often opaque.
Product formulations are sensitive.
And pressure from cosmetics, packaging, and consumer brands is pushing for measurable, auditable impact data.

It’s a wedge into other verticals like energy, plastics, fertilizers, and industrial manufacturing—but one that’s already showing results.

Carbon accounting needs a financial system

What makes this conversation unique isn’t just the product. It’s the co-founders’ view of the ecosystem.

They see a world where sustainability reporting becomes as robust as financial reporting. Where every company knows its Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions the way it knows revenue, gross margin, and EBITDA.

But that world doesn’t exist yet. The data infrastructure isn’t there. The standards are still in flux. And the tooling—until recently—was clunky, manual, and impossible to scale.

Planckton is building that infrastructure—starting with the industries that need it most.

Houston as a launchpad (not just a legacy hub)

Though Planckton has global ambitions, its roots in Houston matter.

The city’s legacy in energy and chemicals gives it a unique edge in understanding real-world industrial challenges. And the growing ecosystem around energy transition—investors, incubators, and founders—is helping companies like Planckton move fast.

“We thought we’d have to move to San Francisco,” Robin shares. “But the resources we needed were already here—just waiting to be activated.”

The future of sustainability is measurable—and monetizable

The takeaway from this episode is clear: measuring your carbon footprint isn’t just good PR—it’s increasingly tied to market access, regulatory approval, and bottom-line efficiency.

And the companies that embrace this shift now—using platforms like Planckton—won’t just stay compliant. They’ll gain a competitive edge.

Listen to the full conversation with Planckton Data on the Energy Tech Startups Podcast:

Hosted by Jason Ethier and Nada Ahmed, the Digital Wildcatters’ podcast, Energy Tech Startups, delves into Houston's pivotal role in the energy transition, spotlighting entrepreneurs and industry leaders shaping a low-carbon future.

Gold H2 harvests clean hydrogen from depleted California reservoirs in first field trial

breakthrough trial

Houston climatech company Gold H2 completed its first field trial that demonstrates subsurface bio-stimulated hydrogen production, which leverages microbiology and existing infrastructure to produce clean hydrogen.

Gold H2 is a spinoff of another Houston biotech company, Cemvita.

“When we compare our tech to the rest of the stack, I think we blow the competition out of the water," Prabhdeep Singh Sekhon, CEO of Gold H2 Sekhon previously told Energy Capital.

The project represented the first-of-its-kind application of Gold H2’s proprietary biotechnology, which generates hydrogen from depleted oil reservoirs, eliminating the need for new drilling, electrolysis or energy-intensive surface facilities. The Woodlands-based ChampionX LLC served as the oilfield services provider, and the trial was conducted in an oilfield in California’s San Joaquin Basin.

According to the company, Gold H2’s technology could yield up to 250 billion kilograms of low-carbon hydrogen, which is estimated to provide enough clean power to Los Angeles for over 50 years and avoid roughly 1 billion metric tons of CO2 equivalent.

“This field trial is tangible proof. We’ve taken a climate liability and turned it into a scalable, low-cost hydrogen solution,” Sekhon said in a news release. “It’s a new blueprint for decarbonization, built for speed, affordability, and global impact.”

Highlights of the trial include:

First-ever demonstration of biologically stimulated hydrogen generation at commercial field scale with unprecedented results of 40 percent H2 in the gas stream.
Demonstrated how end-of-life oilfield liabilities can be repurposed into hydrogen-producing assets.
The trial achieved 400,000 ppm of hydrogen in produced gases, which, according to the company,y is an “unprecedented concentration for a huff-and-puff style operation and a strong indicator of just how robust the process can perform under real-world conditions.”
The field trial marked readiness for commercial deployment with targeted hydrogen production costs below $0.50/kg.

“This breakthrough isn’t just a step forward, it’s a leap toward climate impact at scale,” Jillian Evanko, CEO and president at Chart Industries Inc., Gold H2 investor and advisor, added in the release. “By turning depleted oil fields into clean hydrogen generators, Gold H2 has provided a roadmap to produce low-cost, low-carbon energy using the very infrastructure that powered the last century. This changes the game for how the world can decarbonize heavy industry, power grids, and economies, faster and more affordably than we ever thought possible.”

Rice University spinout lands $500K NSF grant to boost chip sustainability

cooler computing

HEXAspec, a spinout from Rice University's Liu Idea Lab for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, was recently awarded a $500,000 National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation grant.

The team says it will use the funding to continue enhancing semiconductor chips’ thermal conductivity to boost computing power. According to a release from Rice, HEXAspec has developed breakthrough inorganic fillers that allow graphic processing units (GPUs) to use less water and electricity and generate less heat.

The technology has major implications for the future of computing with AI sustainably.

“With the huge scale of investment in new computing infrastructure, the problem of managing the heat produced by these GPUs and semiconductors has grown exponentially. We’re excited to use this award to further our material to meet the needs of existing and emerging industry partners and unlock a new era of computing,” HEXAspec co-founder Tianshu Zhai said in the release.

HEXAspec was founded by Zhai and Chen-Yang Lin, who both participated in the Rice Innovation Fellows program. A third co-founder, Jing Zhang, also worked as a postdoctoral researcher and a research scientist at Rice, according to HEXAspec's website.

The HEXASpec team won the Liu Idea Lab for Innovation and Entrepreneurship's H. Albert Napier Rice Launch Challenge in 2024. More recently, it also won this year's Energy Venture Day and Pitch Competition during CERAWeek in the TEX-E student track, taking home $25,000.

"The grant from the NSF is a game-changer, accelerating the path to market for this transformative technology," Kyle Judah, executive director of Lilie, added in the release.

---

This article originally ran on InnovationMap.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME