Experts: To power an energy revolution, a financing evolution is needed

guest column

Investors in Houston and across Texas are proving to be transformational partners to finance and grow energy hardware startups. Photo via Getty Images

Texas is a national leader in wind and solar, generating more energy in these categories than any other state since 2006 and double that of next placed California. As investment in renewable energy continues to skyrocket, the limitations of the 19th-century grid prevent the industry from realizing the benefits of this 21st-century technology.

For years, Texas has grappled with insufficient infrastructure for its current mix of energy sources, which includes surging renewables. The Alternating Current (AC) grid — the standard since the 1800s — requires matching supply and demand in real-time to maintain a stable frequency, which is complex and costly, especially with renewable energy when the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow.

Startup firms are busy developing technologies to solve this issue. For example, it’s possible to modernize the AC grid to control the voltage of the distribution network precisely, to ensure fast adjustments to demand, and to adapt to changes in supply from renewables. Enoda, a U.K.-based scale-up, is an example of an innovative company developing and delivering technology to enable the AC grid to accommodate much higher levels of renewable energy and electrification.

Equally important to these technical innovations are innovations in financing for energy startups. On two levels, investors in Houston and across Texas are proving to be transformational partners to finance and grow energy hardware startups.

1. Innovative Funding Structures

Because of the long timelines, hardware investing requires, in part, more patient capital than the typical Silicon Valley venture capital model prevalent in startup investments. Their playbook is best suited for software companies that develop new features in weeks or months. Energy hardware startups require a longer timeline because of the far greater complexity and upfront capital outlay.

Texas investment firms and family offices are, however, accustomed to investing in complex energy projects with longer development timelines. This complexity presents a high barrier to entry for competitors, which significantly increases the upside potential that risk-capital investors seek should the innovation find market traction. At the same time, up-front capital requirements have decreased considerably, making hardware more appealing to investors.

2. Visionary partnership

Attracting investors and demonstrating early-stage traction differs for hardware companies because of the lengthy pre-revenue R&D process. Software innovators can launch with a minimum viable product, gain a few early customers, and then grow incrementally. By contrast, energy hardware technology must be fully developed from launch. Each Enoda PRIME exchanger, from the first unit sold, represents a piece of critical infrastructure on which households will rely for their electricity supply for its 30-year lifespan. For venture investors who focus on software, it’s easy to assess the health of a software company based on well-established metrics related to customer growth and the cost of customer acquisition.

Hardware investing requires investors to have a much deeper understanding of the problem being solved and assess the quality of the solution objectively rather than rely on early customers for a minimum viable product. Texas investors have been quick to understand the problems that the energy industry must solve around energy balancing and keeping the frequency of a system stable in order to grow renewable energy. Why the keen insight? Because that problem is being solved today by gas power plants. A visionary investor with many years of deep industry perspective is far more likely to appreciate that than a VC firm looking across many industries based on a standard set of metrics.

Visionary partnership is precisely what energy startups need because it’s important not to evaluate the company as it is today but what it will be in five years. Hardware startups need visionary investor partners who understand the importance of parallel pathing fundamental innovation, product development and delivery, and customer development to grow and succeed. Hardware startups succeed only when they can do these things simultaneously—and require investors who can imagine a possible future and understand the path to reach it.

Changing the way investment works

Many energy startups are worthy inheritors of Houston’s bold entrepreneurial spirit that led to technological innovations like deep-sea drilling and hydraulic fracturing. They will continue to need equally bold investors who recognize the world of opportunities at their doorstep.

———

Paul Domjan is the founder and chief policy and global affairs officer at Enoda. Derek Jones and Paul Morico are partners at Baker Botts.

Texas gets a gold star when it comes to projected wind power capacity. Photo via Getty Images

Texas ranks among the leading states for projected wind power capacity

We're No. 1

A new report ranks Texas in the top three states that are blowing away nationwide wind power capacity projections.

Texas, Wyoming, and Iowa are standing out in terms of wind power capacity, according to a report from Texas Real Estate Source, a Texas real estate, travel, and lifestyle website, that analyzed all 50 states and ranked them by total projected capacity, capacity per capita, and capacity per square mile.

Nationwide wind power capacity is projected to grow exponentially in the coming years, with Texas, Wyoming, and Iowa leading the charge. With 44,974 megawatts of projected wind power capacity, Texas leads the country in terms of volume. Wyoming, meanwhile, leads the nation in projected wind power capacity per capita with 6,679 MW serving a population of 581,381, and Iowa takes first place in projected wind power capacity per square mile.

"As renewable energy continues to command center-stage attention and massive financial investment, wind power has proven to be an indispensable tool in the clean energy toolbox," reads the report.

In its top spot, Texas' projected wind power capacity is more than triple the capacity of second place, Oklahoma, but the Lone Star State falls to ninth place in the ranking of capacity per capita with 1.5 kilowatts.

“It’s no surprise to see Texas significantly outpacing the nation in installed and projected wind power capacity," says a spokesperson from Texas Real Estate Source. "The combination of boundless land, favorable wind patterns, and highly-respected research institutions has made it the perfect place for wind power adoption. It’s revealing, however, to see the per capita and per square mile rankings: they give us a more complete picture of which states are at the forefront of wind power development.”

A few other states to take note of in the report are California and Arkansas. California ranks No. 7 when it comes to total projected wind power capacity but only is No. 24 in the per capita ranking. And, considering the state has only 104 MW currently under construction, California doesn't seem to be keeping up with its population.

Arkansas, meanwhile, has 180 MW currently under construction — previously having a projected zero MW of wind power capacity. Once this is done, Arkansas will outperform 17 other states.

When it comes to wind power jobs, the Lone Star State is making some moves on that front too, according to another report. The SmartAsset study found that 2.23 percent of workers in the Houston area hold down jobs classified as “green.” Per the Department of Energy, Texas tallied almost 25,500 wind energy jobs in 2021.

Energy sources are often categorized as renewable or not, but perhaps a more accurate classification focuses on the type of reaction that converts energy into useful matter. Photo by simpson33/Getty Images

How is energy produced?

ENERGY 101

Many think of the Energy Industry as a dichotomy–old vs. new, renewable vs. nonrenewable, good vs. bad. But like most things, energy comes from an array of sources, and each kind has its own unique benefits and challenges. Understanding the multi-faceted identity of currently available energy sources creates an environment in which new ideas for cleaner and more sustainable energy sourcing can proliferate.

At a high level, energy can be broadly categorized by the process of extracting and converting it into a useful form.

Energy Produced from Chemical Reaction

Energy derived from coal, crude oil, natural gas, and biomass is primarily produced as a result of bonds breaking during a chemical reaction. When heated, burned, or fermented, organic matter releases energy, which is converted into mechanical or electrical energy.

These sources can be stored, distributed, and shared relatively easily and do not have to be converted immediately for power consumption. However, the resulting chemical reaction produces environmentally harmful waste products.

Though the processes to extract these organic sources of energy have been refined for many years to achieve reliable and cheap energy, they can be risky and are perceived as invasive to mother nature.

According to the 2022 bp Statistical Review of World Energy, approximately 50% of the world’s energy consumption comes from petroleum and natural gas; another 25% from coal. Though there was a small decline in demand for oil from 2019 to 2021, the overall demand for fossil fuels remained unchanged during the same time frame, mostly due to the increase in natural gas and coal consumption.

Energy Produced from Mechanical Reaction

Energy captured from the earth’s heat or the movement of wind and water results from the mechanical processes enabled by the turning of turbines in source-rich environments. These turbines spin to produce electricity inside a generator.

Solar energy does not require the use of a generator but produces electricity due to the release of electrons from the semiconducting materials found on a solar panel. The electricity produced by geothermal, wind, solar, and hydropower is then converted from direct current to alternating current electricity.

Electricity is most useful for immediate consumption, as storage requires the use of batteries–a process that turns electrical energy into chemical energy that can then be accessed in much the same way that coal, crude oil, natural gas, and biomass produce energy.

Energy Produced from a Combination of Reactions

Hydrogen energy comes from a unique blend of both electrical and chemical energy processes. Despite hydrogen being the most abundant element on earth, it is rarely found on its own, requiring a two-step process to extract and convert energy into a usable form. Hydrogen is primarily produced as a by-product of fossil fuels, with its own set of emissions challenges related to separating the hydrogen from the hydrocarbons.

Many use electrolysis to separate hydrogen from other elements before performing a chemical reaction to create electrical energy inside of a contained fuel cell. The electrolysis process is certainly a more environmentally-friendly solution, but there are still great risks with hydrogen energy–it is highly flammable, and its general energy output is less than that of other electricity-generating methods.

Energy Produced from Nuclear Reaction

Finally, energy originating from the splitting of an atom’s nucleus, mostly through nuclear fission, is yet another way to produce energy. A large volume of heat is released when an atom is bombarded by neutrons in a nuclear power plant, which is then converted to electrical energy.

This process also produces a particularly sensitive by-product known as radiation, and with it, radioactive waste. The proper handling of radiation and radioactive waste is of utmost concern, as its effects can be incredibly damaging to the environment surrounding a nuclear power plant.

Nuclear fission produces minimal carbon, so nuclear energy is oft considered environmentally safe–as long as strict protocols are followed to ensure proper storage and disposal of radiation and radioactive waste.

Nuclear to Mechanical to Chemical?

Interestingly enough, the Earth’s heat comes from the decay of radioactive materials in the Earth’s core, loosely linking nuclear power production back to geothermal energy production.

It’s also clear the conversion of energy into electricity is the cleanest option for the environment, yet adequate infrastructure remains limited in supply and accessibility. If not consumed immediately as electricity, energy is thus converted into a chemical form for the convenience of storage and distribution it provides.

Perhaps the expertise and talent of Houstonians serving the flourishing academic and industrial sectors of energy development will soon resolve many of our current energy challenges by exploring further the circular dynamic of the energy environment. Be sure to check out our Events Page to find the networking event that best serves your interest in the Energy Transition.

------

Lindsey Ferrell is a contributing writer to EnergyCapitalHTX and founder of Guerrella & Co.

Ad Placement 300x100

Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

NASA and Houston researcher tackle climate-driven water quality risks

water watch

Climate change means far more to public health than living with hotter days. Transformations in our weather are contributing to challenges in accessing safe drinking water in some communities.

One of the most dire situations is along the US–Mexico border. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is seeking to address that issue with its Water Quality Applications program. An 11-researcher project led by a UTHealth Houston School of Public Health faculty member has been selected to participate.

“Drinking water is one of the most fundamental public health protections, but producing safe drinking water involves a delicate balance,” Yun Hang, assistant professor of environmental and occupational health sciences, said in a news release. Her team’s proposal was one of 93 that were submitted for funding through NASA’s Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES)-2025 program.

This is the first time that NASA has worked with a team devoted to water quality applications. The group, which includes researchers from across the nation, will use satellite observations of Earth, as well as hydrologic modeling, to potentially anticipate and act on water quality conditions as they change. Challenges addressed over the course of the three-year program, which kicked off in June, might include problems with water quality due to climate variability and increased pressure on water resources.

Hang’s team will focus on a pair of borderlands: Paso del Norte and the Rio Grande Valley.

“Working closely with El Paso Water ensures that our research addresses real operational needs while helping utilities better prepare for climate-related water quality changes and continue providing safe drinking water to communities across the Texas border region,” Hang added in the release.

She and the team will use data gathered by NASA on both past and future Earth-observing missions, which will allow them to track environmental changes that may affect source water quality. Combined with past water treatment records and hydrologic models, the team will also utilize artificial intelligence to develop predictive tools that aim to stop issues before they become larger hurdles to water safety.

Another one of the project’s goals is to create visualization tools and source water summaries that can be utilized by those without scientific expertise. The tools will be produced in English and Spanish to further broaden their accessibility.

The hope is that the materials made by the team will also go far beyond the border, with protocols that can be adapted or adopted by other areas dealing with water quality issues.

---

This article originally appeared on our sister site, InnovationMap.com.

New research reveals what really drives data center location decisions

Guest Column

Recent power outages and the surge in AI-driven computing have made data center siting decisions more consequential than ever, especially as energy and water constraints tighten. Communities invest public dollars on the promise of jobs and growth, while firms weigh long-term commitments to land, power and connectivity.

Against that evolving backdrop, a critical question comes into focus: Where do data centers get built — and what actually drives those decisions?

A new study by Tommy Pan Fang (Rice Business) and Shane Greenstein (Harvard Business School) provides the first large-scale statistical analysis of data center location strategies across the United States. It offers policymakers and firms a clearer starting point for understanding how different types of data centers respond to economic and strategic incentives.

Published in the journal Strategy Science, the study examines two major types of infrastructure: third-party colocation centers that lease server space to multiple firms, and hyperscale cloud centers owned by providers like Amazon, Google and Microsoft.

Key takeaways:

Third-party colocation centers are physical facilities in close proximity to firms that use them, while cloud providers operate large data centers from a distance and sell access to virtualized computing resources as on‑demand services over the internet.
Hospitals and financial firms often require urban third-party centers for low latency and regulatory compliance, while batch processing and many AI workloads can operate more efficiently from lower-cost cloud hubs.
For policymakers trying to attract data centers, access to reliable power, water and high-capacity internet matter more than tax incentives.

What are the two main data center location strategies?

The study draws on pre-pandemic data from 2018 and 2019, a period of relative geographic stability in supply and demand. This window gives researchers a clean baseline before remote work, AI demand and new infrastructure pressures began reshaping internet traffic patterns.

The findings show that data centers follow a bifurcated geography:

Third-party centers cluster in dense urban markets, where buyers prioritize proximity to customers despite higher land and operating costs.
Cloud providers, by contrast, concentrate massive sites in a small number of lower-density regions, where electricity, land and construction are cheaper and economies of scale are easier to achieve.

Third-party data centers, in other words, follow demand. They locate in urban markets where firms in finance, healthcare and IT value low latency, secure storage, and compliance with regulatory standards.

Using county-level data, the researchers modeled how population density, industry mix and operating costs predict where new centers enter. Every U.S. metro with more than 700,000 residents had at least one third-party provider, while many mid-sized cities had none.

This pattern challenges common assumptions. Third-party facilities are more distributed across urban America than prevailing narratives suggest.

“For industries where speed is everything, being too far from the physical infrastructure can meaningfully affect performance and risk,” Pan Fang says. “Proximity isn’t optional for sectors that can’t absorb delay.”

In critical operations, even slight pauses can have real consequences. For hospital systems, lag can affect performance and risk exposure. And in high-frequency trading, milliseconds can determine whether value is captured or lost in a transaction.

Why does distance matter for cloud data center costs?

For cloud providers, the picture looks very different. Their decisions follow a logic shaped primarily by cost and scale. Because cloud services can be delivered from afar, firms tend to build enormous sites in low-density regions where power is cheap and land is abundant.

These facilities can draw hundreds of megawatts of electricity and operate with far fewer employees than urban centers. “The cloud can serve almost anywhere,” Pan Fang says, “so location is a question of cost before geography.”

The study finds that cloud infrastructure clusters around network backbones and energy economics, not talent pools. Well-known hubs like Ashburn, Virginia — often called “Data Center Alley” — reflect this logic, having benefited from early network infrastructure that made them natural convergence points for digital traffic.

Local governments often try to lure data centers with tax incentives, betting they will create high-tech jobs. But the study suggests other factors matter more to cloud providers, including construction costs, network connectivity and access to reliable, affordable electricity.

When cloud centers need a local presence, distance can sometimes become a constraint. Providers often address this by working alongside third-party operators. “Third-party centers can complement cloud firms when they need a foothold closer to customers,” Pan Fang says.

That hybrid pattern — massive regional hubs complementing strategic colocation — may define the next phase of data center growth.

Looking ahead, shifts in remote work, climate resilience, energy prices and AI-driven computing may reshape where new facilities go. Some workloads may move closer to users, while others may consolidate into large rural hubs. Emerging data-sovereignty rules could also redirect investment beyond the United States.

“The cloud feels weightless,” Pan Fang says, “but it rests on real choices about land, power and proximity.”

---

This article originally appeared on Rice Business Wisdom. Written by Scott Pett. Pan Fang and Greenstein (2025). “Where the Cloud Rests: The Economic Geography of Data Centers,” Strategy Science.

ERock scores Anthropic deal, sees order backlog soar to $1.7B

power deal

Two months after its $400 million IPO, Houston-based ERock (NYSE: EROC) has landed a power-generator deal with AI powerhouse Anthropic, owner of the Claude platform.

In its Q2 earnings report, ERock says it will provide equipment to Anthropic with a 470-megawatt capacity. ERock specializes in utility-grade, onsite microgrid power systems for data centers and other customers. The company previously did business as Enchanted Rock.

The Anthropic deal adds to ERock’s backlog of about $1.7 billion in orders—a figure representing a 1,000 percent year-over-year jump in backorders thanks in large part to the AI boom. ERock expects most of the backlog to convert to revenue by the end of 2027, said Ian Blakely, the company’s chief financial officer.

Bank of America analyst Ross Fowler says the Anthropic contract boosts confidence in ERock’s ability to secure other major deals, according to Traders Union. The Anthropic deal is ERock’s third major data center contract, with separate Anthropic deals for operations and maintenance services expected to follow, Fowler said.

CEO John Carrington says Anthropic’s order “reinforces the momentum” ERock is witnessing across its customer base.

“We are seeing a lot of interest in Texas. It seems to be the easiest place to get a site set up,” company President Corey Amthor said

In its Q2 earnings release—its first as a public company—ERock also reported:

Launching generator-assembly operations at its Hyperion equipment factory in Northwest Houston. The plant will expand ERock’s assembly capabilities to 1.2 gigawatts of capacity by the end of 2026.
Starting construction of a $473 million, 366-megawatt El Paso Electric natural-gas-powered plant to supply power for Meta Platforms’ $14 billion, 1,000-acre AI data center campus in El Paso. Meta is the parent company of the Facebook and Instagram social media companies.

“Meta gains access to an operational data center years earlier than may otherwise be possible, while El Paso Electric gains a flexible, low-cost, low-emissions grid asset that can support long-term system reliability,” Carrington said.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME