ADVERTISEABOUT USSUBMIT A STORYSUBSCRIBETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY
Visit our family of Brands

Houston energy transition innovators named finalists for annual awards program

best of the rest

Nearly 20 Houston startups and innovators were named finalists for the 2024 Houston Innovation Awards this week. Photo via Getty Images

The Houston Innovation Awards have named its honorees for its 2024 awards event, and several clean energy innovators have made the cut.

The finalists, which were named on EnergyCapital's sister site InnovationMap this week, were decided by this year's judges after they reviewed over 130 applications. More 50 finalists will be recognized in particular for their achievements across 13 categories, which includes the 2024 Trailblazer Legacy Awards that were announced earlier this month.

All of the honorees will be recognized at the event on November 14 and the winners will be named. Registration is open online.

Representing the energy industry, the startup finalists include:

  • Amperon, an AI platform powering the smart grid of the future, was named a finalist in the Energy Transition Business category.
  • ARIXTechnologies, an integrated robotics and data analytics company that delivers inspection services through its robotics platforms, was named a finalist in the Energy Transition Business and the AI/Data Science Business categories.
  • CLS Wind, a self-erection wind turbine tower system provider for the wind energy industry, was named a finalist in the Minority-Founded Business category.
  • Corrolytics, a technology startup founded to solve microbiologically influenced corrosion problems for industrial assets, was named a finalist in the Minority-Founded Business and People's Choice: Startup of the Year categories.
  • Elementium Materials, a battery technology with liquid electrolyte solutions, was named a finalist in the Energy Transition Business category.
  • Enovate Ai, a provider of business and operational process optimization for decarbonization and energy independence, was named a finalist in the AI/Data Science Business category.
  • FluxWorks, developer and manufacturer of magnetic gears and magnetic gear-integrated motors, was named a finalist in the Deep Tech Business category.
  • Gold H2, a startup that's transforming depleted oil fields into hydrogen-producing assets utilizing existing infrastructure, was named a finalist in the Minority-Founded Business and the Deep Tech Business categories.
  • Hertha Metals, developer of a technology that cost-effectively produces steel with fewer carbon emissions, was named a finalist in the Deep Tech Business category.
  • InnoVentRenewables, a startup with proprietary continuous pyrolysis technology that converts waste tires, plastics, and biomass into valuable fuels and chemicals, was named a finalist in the Energy Transition Business and the People's Choice: Startup of the Year categories.
  • NanoTech Materials, a chemical manufacturer that integrates novel heat-control technology with thermal insulation, fireproofing, and cool roof coatings to drastically improve efficiency and safety, was named a finalist in the Scaleup of the Year category.
  • SageGeosystems, an energy company focused on developing and deploying advanced geothermal technologies to provide reliable power and sustainable energy storage solutions regardless of geography, was named a finalist in the Energy Transition Business category.
  • Square Robot, an advanced robotics company serving the energy industry and beyond by providing submersible robots for storage tank inspections, was named a finalist in the Scaleup of the Year category.
  • Syzygy Plasmonics, a company that's decarbonizing chemical production with a light-powered reactor platform that electrifies the production of hydrogen, syngas, and fuel with reliable, low-cost solutions, was named a finalist in the Scaleup of the Year category.
  • TierraClimate, a software provider that helps grid-scale batteries reduce carbon emissions, was named a finalist in the Energy Transition Business category.
  • Voyager Portal, a software platform that helps commodity traders and manufacturers in the O&G, chemicals, agriculture, mining, and project cargo sectors optimize the voyage management lifecycle, was named a finalist in the AI/Data Science Business category.

In addition to the startup finalists, two energy transition-focused organizations were recognized in the Community Champion Organization category, honoring a corporation, nonprofit, university, or other organization that plays a major role in the Houston innovation community. The two finalists in that category are:

  • Energy Tech Nexus, a new global energy and carbon tech hub focusing on hard tech solutions that provides mentor, accelerator and educational programs for entrepreneurs and underserved communities.
  • Greentown Houston, a climatetech incubator and convener for the energy transition community that provides community engagement and programming in partnership with corporations and other organizations.

Lastly, a few energy transition innovators were honored in the individual categories, including Carlos Estrada, growth partner at First Bight Ventures and head of venture acceleration at BioWell; Juliana Garaizar, founding partner of Energy Tech Nexus; and Neal Dikeman, partner at Energy Transition Ventures.

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

Property Showcase

Texas among top states for EV charging access, report shows

by the numbers

A new study from FinanceBuzz reports that Texas has the fifth most public electric vehicle charging stations among states in the U.S.

In its Electric Vehicle (EV) Statistics [2025]: Trends in Sales, Savings, and More report, FinanceBuzz, a personal finance and investment adviser, compiled electric vehicle data to find sales trends, adoption rates, charging infrastructure, costs, savings and more.

Texas has a total of 3,709 public EV charging stations, which equals about 16 stations per 1,000 EVs, according to the report. The remaining top five included:

  • No. 1 California with 17,122 EV charging stations
  • No. 2 New York with 4,814 EV charging stations
  • No.3 Massachusetts with 3,738 EV charging stations
  • No. 4 Florida with 3,715 EV charging stations

Los Angeles had the most public charging stations at 1,609 among U.S. cities. Austin was Texas’s top city with 656 stations.

The study also looked at how much Americans are spending on transportation, and found that the average American using a gas vehicle spends $1,865 annually on fuel. FinanceBuzz found that electric vehicle owners would pay 65 percent less on energy costs. Calculations were based on driving 14,489 miles annually, which measures to 37.9 miles per day. The full report sourced data from the International Energy Agency, the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Transportation, AAA, the U.S. Energy Information Administration and other organizations.

The report said Americans purchased over 1.5 million EVs in 2024, which equals approximately 10 percent of all new light-duty vehicles sold, citing information from the International Council on Clean Transportation.

While Tesla remains the most popular make, 24 new EV models were launched in 2024 by other companies, which represents a 15 percent increase from the previous year.

Other trends in the report included:

  • The U.S. now has more than 64,000 public charging stations and over 168,000 charging ports, which is up from fewer than 1,000 stations in 2010.
  • An average EV owner will spend about $654 per year on electricity, compared to $1,865 for a gas-powered vehicle. The savings equate to about $1,211 per year.
  • In 2024, U.S. EV sales surpassed 1.5 million, but the pace slowed compared to the previous year, with a 10 percent increase versus 40 percent in 2023.
  • Insuring an EV can be more costly because parts are harder to come by, making repairs and replacements more expensive.
  • In the second quarter of 2024, nearly half of new EVs were leased, which is a 28 percentage point increase since 2021.

CenterPoint Energy names new COO as resiliency initiatives continue

new hire

CenterPoint Energy has named Jesus Soto Jr. as its new executive vice president and chief operating officer.

An energy industry veteran with deep ties to Texas, Soto will oversee the company's electric operations, gas operations, safety, supply chain, and customer care functions. The company says Soto will also focus on improving reliability and meeting the increased energy needs in the states CenterPoint serves.

"We are pleased to be able to welcome a leader of Jesus Soto's caliber to CenterPoint's executive team,” Jason Wells, CEO and president of CenterPoint, said in a news release. “We have one of the most dynamic growth stories in the industry, and over the next five years we will deliver over $31 billion of investments across our footprint as part of our capital plan. Jesus's deep understanding and background are the perfect match to help us deliver this incredible scope of work at-pace that will foster the economic development and growth demands in our key markets. He will also be instrumental in helping us continue to focus on improving safety and delivering better reliability for all the communities we are fortunate to serve.”

Soto comes to CenterPoint with over 30 years of experience in leading large teams and executing large scale capital projects. As a longtime Houstonian, he served in roles as executive vice president of Quanta Services and COO for Mears Group Inc. He also served in senior leadership roles at other utility and energy companies, including PG&E Corporation in Northern California and El Paso Corp. in Houston.

Soto has a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from the University of Texas at El Paso, and a master's degree in civil engineering from Texas A&M University. He has a second master's degree in business administration from the University of Phoenix.

“I'm excited to join CenterPoint's high-performing team,” Soto said in the news release. “It's a true privilege to be able to serve our 7 million customers in Texas, Indiana, Ohio and Minnesota. We have an incredible amount of capital work ahead of us to help meet the growing energy needs of our customers and communities, especially across Texas.”

Soto will join the company on Aug. 11 and report to Wells as CenterPoint continues on its Greater Houston Resiliency Initiative and Systemwide Resiliency Plan.

“To help realize our resiliency and growth goals, I look forward to helping our teams deliver this work safely while helping our customers experience better outcomes,” Soto added in the news release. “They expect, and deserve, no less.”

Oil markets on edge: Geopolitics, supply risks, and what comes next

guest column

Oil prices are once again riding the waves of geopolitics. Uncertainty remains a key factor shaping global energy trends.

As of June 25, 2025, U.S. gas prices were averaging around $3.22 per gallon, well below last summer’s levels and certainly not near any recent high. Meanwhile, Brent crude is trading near $68 per barrel, though analysts warn that renewed escalation especially involving Iran and the Strait of Hormuz could push prices above $90 or even $100. Trump’s recent comments that China may continue purchasing Iranian oil add yet another layer of geopolitical complexity.

So how should we think about the state of the oil market and what lies ahead over the next year?

That question was explored on the latest episode of The Energy Forum with experts Skip York and Abhi Rajendran, who both bring deep experience in analyzing global oil dynamics.

“About 20% of the world’s oil and LNG flows through the Strait of Hormuz,” said Skip. “When conflict looms, even the perception of disruption can move the market $5 a barrel or more.”

This is exactly what we saw recently: a market reacting not just to actual supply and demand, but to perceived risk. And that risk is compounding existing challenges, where global demand remains steady, but supply has been slow to respond.

Abhi noted that U.S. shale production has been flat so far this year, and that given the market’s volatility, it’s becoming harder to stay short on oil. In his view, a higher price floor may be taking hold, with longer-lasting upward pressure likely if current dynamics continue.

Meanwhile, OPEC+ is signaling supply increases, but actual delivery has underwhelmed. Add in record-breaking summer heat in the Middle East, pulling up seasonal demand, and it’s easy to see why both experts foresee a return to the $70–$80 range, even without a major shock.

Longer-term, structural changes in China’s energy mix are starting to reshape demand patterns globally. Diesel and gasoline may have peaked, while petrochemical feedstock growth continues.

Skip noted that China has chosen to expand mobility through “electrons, not molecules,” a reference to electric vehicles over conventional fuels. He pointed out that EVs now account for over 50% of monthly vehicle sales, a signal of a longer-term shift in China’s energy demand.

But geopolitical context matters as much as market math. In his recent policy brief, Jim Krane points out that Trump’s potential return to a “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran is no longer guaranteed strong support from Gulf allies.

Jim points out that Saudi and Emirati leaders are taking a more cautious approach this time, worried that another clash with Iran could deter investors and disrupt progress on Vision 2030. Past attacks and regional instability continue to shape their more restrained approach.

And Iran, for its part, has evolved. The “dark fleet” of sanctions-evasion tankers has expanded, and exports are booming up to 2 million barrels per day, mostly to China. Disruption won’t be as simple as targeting a single export terminal anymore, with infrastructure like the Jask terminal outside the Strait of Hormuz.

Where do we go from here?

Skip suggests we may see prices drift upward through 2026 as OPEC+ runs out of spare capacity and U.S. shale declines. Abhi is even more bullish, seeing potential for a quicker climb if demand strengthens and supply falters.

We’re entering a phase where geopolitical missteps, whether in Tehran, Beijing, or Washington, can have outsized impacts. Market fundamentals matter, but political risk is the wildcard that could rewrite the price deck overnight.

As these dynamics continue to evolve, one thing is clear: energy policy, diplomacy, and investment strategy must be strategically coordinated to manage risk and maintain market stability. The stakes for global markets are simply too high for misalignment.

------------

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.

View All Listings