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

Rice research team's study keeps CO2-to-fuel devices running 50 times longer

new findings

In a new study published in the journal Science, a team of Rice University researchers shared findings on how acid bubbles can improve the stability of electrochemical devices that convert carbon dioxide into useful fuels and chemicals.

The team led by Rice associate professor Hoatian Wang addressed an issue in the performance and stability of CO2 reduction systems. The gas flow channels in the systems often clog due to salt buildup, reducing efficiency and causing the devices to fail prematurely after about 80 hours of operation.

“Salt precipitation blocks CO2 transport and floods the gas diffusion electrode, which leads to performance failure,” Wang said in a news release. “This typically happens within a few hundred hours, which is far from commercial viability.”

By using an acid-humidified CO2 technique, the team was able to extend the operational life of a CO2 reduction system more than 50-fold, demonstrating more than 4,500 hours of stable operation in a scaled-up reactor.

The Rice team made a simple swap with a significant impact. Instead of using water to humidify the CO2 gas input into the reactor, the team bubbled the gas through an acid solution such as hydrochloric, formic or acetic acid. This process made more soluble salt formations that did not crystallize or block the channels.

The process has major implications for an emerging green technology known as electrochemical CO2 reduction, or CO2RR, that transforms climate-warming CO2 into products like carbon monoxide, ethylene, or alcohols. The products can be further refined into fuels or feedstocks.

“Using the traditional method of water-humidified CO2 could lead to salt formation in the cathode gas flow channels,” Shaoyun Hao, postdoctoral research associate in chemical and biomolecular engineering at Rice and co-first author, explained in the news release. “We hypothesized — and confirmed — that acid vapor could dissolve the salt and convert the low solubility KHCO3 into salt with higher solubility, thus shifting the solubility balance just enough to avoid clogging without affecting catalyst performance.”

The Rice team believes the work can lead to more scalable CO2 electrolyzers, which is vital if the technology is to be deployed at industrial scales as part of carbon capture and utilization strategies. Since the approach itself is relatively simple, it could lead to a more cost-effective and efficient solution. It also worked well with multiple catalyst types, including zinc oxide, copper oxide and bismuth oxide, which are allo used to target different CO2RR products.

“Our method addresses a long-standing obstacle with a low-cost, easily implementable solution,” Ahmad Elgazzar, co-first author and graduate student in chemical and biomolecular engineering at Rice, added in the release. “It’s a step toward making carbon utilization technologies more commercially viable and more sustainable.”

A team led by Wang and in collaboration with researchers from the University of Houston also shared findings on salt precipitation buildup and CO2RR in a recent edition of the journal Nature Energy. Read more here.

The case for smarter CUI inspections in the energy sector

Guest Column

Corrosion under insulation (CUI) accounts for roughly 60% of pipeline leaks in the U.S. oil and gas sector. Yet many operators still rely on outdated inspection methods that are slow, risky, and economically unsustainable.

This year, widespread budget cuts and layoffs across the sector are forcing refineries to do more with less. Efficiency is no longer a goal; it’s a mandate. The challenge: how to maintain safety and reliability without overextending resources?

Fortunately, a new generation of technologies is gaining traction in the oil and gas industry, offering operators faster, safer, and more cost-effective ways to identify and mitigate CUI.

Hidden cost of corrosion

Corrosion is a pervasive threat, with CUI posing the greatest risk to refinery operations. Insulation conceals damage until it becomes severe, making detection difficult and ultimately leading to failure. NACE International estimates the annual cost of corrosion in the U.S. at $276 billion.

Compounding the issue is aging infrastructure: roughly half of the nation’s 2.6 million miles of pipeline are over 50 years old. Aging infrastructure increases the urgency and the cost of inspections.

So, the question is: Are we at a breaking point or an inflection point? The answer depends largely on how quickly the industry can move beyond inspection methods that no longer match today's operational or economic realities.

Legacy methods such as insulation stripping, scaffolding, and manual NDT are slow, hazardous, and offer incomplete coverage. With maintenance budgets tightening, these methods are no longer viable.

Why traditional inspection falls short

Without question, what worked 50 years ago no longer works today. Traditional inspection methods are slow, siloed, and dangerously incomplete.

Insulation removal:

Disruptive and expensive.
Labor-intensive and time-consuming, with a high risk of process upsets and insulation damage.
Limited coverage. Often targets a small percentage of piping, leaving large areas unchecked.
Health risks: Exposes workers to hazardous materials such as asbestos or fiberglass.

Rope access and scaffolding:

Safety hazards. Falls from height remain a leading cause of injury.
Restricted time and access. Weather, fatigue, and complex layouts limit coverage and effectiveness.
High coordination costs. Multiple contractors, complex scheduling, and oversight, which require continuous monitoring, documentation, and compliance assurance across vendors and protocols drive up costs.

Spot checks:

Low detection probability. Random sampling often fails to detect localized corrosion.
Data gaps. Paper records and inconsistent methods hinder lifecycle asset planning.
Reactive, not proactive: Problems are often discovered late after damage has already occurred.

A smarter way forward

While traditional NDT methods for CUI like Pulsed Eddy Current (PEC) and Real-Time Radiography (RTR) remain valuable, the addition of robotic systems, sensors, and AI are transforming CUI inspection.

Robotic systems, sensors, and AI are reshaping how CUI inspections are conducted, reducing reliance on manual labor and enabling broader, data-rich asset visibility for better planning and decision-making.

ARIX Technologies, for example, introduced pipe-climbing robotic systems capable of full-coverage inspections of insulated pipes without the need for insulation removal. Venus, ARIX’s pipe-climbing robot, delivers full 360° CUI data across both vertical and horizontal pipe circuits — without magnets, scaffolding, or insulation removal. It captures high-resolution visuals and Pulsed Eddy Current (PEC) data simultaneously, allowing operators to review inspection video and analyze corrosion insights in one integrated workflow. This streamlines data collection, speeds up analysis, and keeps personnel out of hazardous zones — making inspections faster, safer, and far more actionable.

These integrated technology platforms are driving measurable gains:

Autonomous grid scanning: Delivers structured, repeatable coverage across pipe surfaces for greater inspection consistency.
Integrated inspection portal: Combines PEC, RTR, and video into a unified 3D visualization, streamlining analysis across inspection teams.
Actionable insights: Enables more confident planning and risk forecasting through digital, shareable data—not siloed or static.

Real-world results

Petromax Refining adopted ARIX’s robotic inspection systems to modernize its CUI inspections, and its results were substantial and measurable:

Inspection time dropped from nine months to 39 days.
Costs were cut by 63% compared to traditional methods.
Scaffolding was minimized 99%, reducing hazardous risks and labor demands.
Data accuracy improved, supporting more innovative maintenance planning.

Why the time is now

Energy operators face mounting pressure from all sides: aging infrastructure, constrained budgets, rising safety risks, and growing ESG expectations.

In the U.S., downstream operators are increasingly piloting drone and crawler solutions to automate inspection rounds in refineries, tank farms, and pipelines. Over 92% of oil and gas companies report that they are investing in AI or robotic technologies or have plans to invest soon to modernize operations.

The tools are here. The data is here. Smarter inspection is no longer aspirational — it’s operational. The case has been made. Petromax and others are showing what’s possible. Smarter inspection is no longer a leap but a step forward.

---

Tyler Flanagan is director of service & operations at Houston-based ARIX Technologies.

Scientists warn greenhouse gas accumulation is accelerating and more extreme weather will come

Climate Report

Humans are on track to release so much greenhouse gas in less than three years that a key threshold for limiting global warming will be nearly unavoidable, according to a study released June 19.

The report predicts that society will have emitted enough carbon dioxide by early 2028 that crossing an important long-term temperature boundary will be more likely than not. The scientists calculate that by that point there will be enough of the heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere to create a 50-50 chance or greater that the world will be locked in to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of long-term warming since preindustrial times. That level of gas accumulation, which comes from the burning of fuels like gasoline, oil and coal, is sooner than the same group of 60 international scientists calculated in a study last year.

“Things aren’t just getting worse. They’re getting worse faster,” said study co-author Zeke Hausfather of the tech firm Stripe and the climate monitoring group Berkeley Earth. “We’re actively moving in the wrong direction in a critical period of time that we would need to meet our most ambitious climate goals. Some reports, there’s a silver lining. I don’t think there really is one in this one.”

That 1.5 goal, first set in the 2015 Paris agreement, has been a cornerstone of international efforts to curb worsening climate change. Scientists say crossing that limit would mean worse heat waves and droughts, bigger storms and sea-level rise that could imperil small island nations. Over the last 150 years, scientists have established a direct correlation between the release of certain levels of carbon dioxide, along with other greenhouse gases like methane, and specific increases in global temperatures.

In Thursday's Indicators of Global Climate Change report, researchers calculated that society can spew only 143 billion more tons (130 billion metric tons) of carbon dioxide before the 1.5 limit becomes technically inevitable. The world is producing 46 billion tons (42 billion metric tons) a year, so that inevitability should hit around February 2028 because the report is measured from the start of this year, the scientists wrote. The world now stands at about 1.24 degrees Celsius (2.23 degrees Fahrenheit) of long-term warming since preindustrial times, the report said.

Earth's energy imbalance

The report, which was published in the journal Earth System Science Data, shows that the rate of human-caused warming per decade has increased to nearly half a degree (0.27 degrees Celsius) per decade, Hausfather said. And the imbalance between the heat Earth absorbs from the sun and the amount it radiates out to space, a key climate change signal, is accelerating, the report said.

“It's quite a depressing picture unfortunately, where if you look across the indicators, we find that records are really being broken everywhere,” said lead author Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate Futures at the University of Leeds in England. “I can't conceive of a situation where we can really avoid passing 1.5 degrees of very long-term temperature change.”

The increase in emissions from fossil-fuel burning is the main driver. But reduced particle pollution, which includes soot and smog, is another factor because those particles had a cooling effect that masked even more warming from appearing, scientists said. Changes in clouds also factor in. That all shows up in Earth’s energy imbalance, which is now 25% higher than it was just a decade or so ago, Forster said.

Earth’s energy imbalance “is the most important measure of the amount of heat being trapped in the system,” Hausfather said.

Earth keeps absorbing more and more heat than it releases. “It is very clearly accelerating. It’s worrisome,” he said.

Crossing the temperature limit

The planet temporarily passed the key 1.5 limit last year. The world hit 1.52 degrees Celsius (2.74 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming since preindustrial times for an entire year in 2024, but the Paris threshold is meant to be measured over a longer period, usually considered 20 years. Still, the globe could reach that long-term threshold in the next few years even if individual years haven't consistently hit that mark, because of how the Earth's carbon cycle works.

That 1.5 is “a clear limit, a political limit for which countries have decided that beyond which the impact of climate change would be unacceptable to their societies,” said study co-author Joeri Rogelj, a climate scientist at Imperial College London.

The mark is so important because once it is crossed, many small island nations could eventually disappear because of sea level rise, and scientific evidence shows that the impacts become particularly extreme beyond that level, especially hurting poor and vulnerable populations, he said. He added that efforts to curb emissions and the impacts of climate change must continue even if the 1.5 degree threshold is exceeded.

Crossing the threshold "means increasingly more frequent and severe climate extremes of the type we are now seeing all too often in the U.S. and around the world — unprecedented heat waves, extreme hot drought, extreme rainfall events, and bigger storms,” said University of Michigan environment school dean Jonathan Overpeck, who wasn't part of the study.

Andrew Dessler, a Texas A&M University climate scientist who wasn't part of the study, said the 1.5 goal was aspirational and not realistic, so people shouldn’t focus on that particular threshold.

“Missing it does not mean the end of the world,” Dessler said in an email, though he agreed that “each tenth of a degree of warming will bring increasingly worse impacts.”

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME