Impact Investing - Green Prophet

Nobul’s Regan McGee on Shareholder Value: “Complacency Is the Silent Killer”

Bhok Thompson — Fri, 27 Mar 2026 09:18:25 +0000

Regan McGee of Nobul

Why the governance framework designed to protect shareholders so often fails them

There is a pattern Regan McGee has watched repeat itself across industries, company sizes, and market cycles. A business reaches a certain scale. The founding hunger fades. A professional management layer arrives. The board fills with credentialed names who attend meetings, approve budgets, and collect fees. Shareholder returns flatten. Then, quietly, they begin to erode.

McGee, founder and CEO of Nobul, has spent the better part of two decades working across capital markets, private equity, and technology. That experience has produced a view on corporate governance that most governance commentators would rather not engage with directly: the framework that is supposed to protect shareholders is often the very thing that guarantees their mediocrity.

“I think complacency is the silent killer,” McGee says. “It just takes a long time for the market to recognize it.”

The Complacency Premium

Research from Bain & Company found that founder-led S&P 500 companies performed 3.1 times better than all other S&P 500 companies over the 25-year period from 1990 to 2014.

That is not a marginal difference. That is a fundamentally different outcome for the people who own the shares.

The companies producing those returns include Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, and Dell, which are precisely the ones that conventional governance frameworks have flagged most often for concentrated control, founders who resist ceding authority, and compensation structures that draw scrutiny. But by the metric that actually matters to the people who own the shares, they have been transformational.

A study by Professor Rüdiger Fahlenbrach of the Swiss Federal Technology Institute of Lausanne found that an investment strategy tracking founder-CEO firms from 1993 to 2002 would have earned a benchmark-adjusted return of 8.3% annually. After controlling for firm size, industry, and other variables, the abnormal outperformance held at 4.4% annually. The research also found that founder-CEO firms consistently outinvested their peers in R&D and capital expenditure.

Taken together, the data points to the same conclusion: the governance structures often celebrated by proxy advisors and institutional consultants don’t necessarily correlate with the best shareholder outcomes.

What distinguishes the outperforming companies is not luck or sector tailwinds alone. It is, as McGee describes it, a culture of hunger. A refusal to treat existing scale as a destination rather than a starting point. A willingness to make bold, sometimes uncomfortable decisions that a committee-driven board may have voted down.

“Once you get into so-called good governance,” McGee observes, “you’re going to perform at the same as the market, unfortunately.”

When Compensation Structure Isn’t Tied to Results

Before examining how boards fail quietly, it is worth examining a case where the failure was structural and precise.

McGee recalled a compensation arrangement where the incentive to underperform was not a side effect but a feature.

The CEO made himself the biggest shareholder in the company,” he explained. “The company had actually created his comps package so that the more he lowered the stock price, the more the company would control. He was actually incentivized to drive the stock price down.”

Pause on that for a moment. This was not a misaligned incentive that slipped through a governance gap. It was a structure that was reviewed, approved, and put in place by a board with full access to the terms. The CEO was not merely failing to grow shareholder value. He was being paid to shrink it. The board that existed to prevent exactly that outcome had instead encoded it into his contract.

The shareholders in this company woke up every day owning shares in a business whose leadership had a direct financial interest in those shares being worth less tomorrow than they were today. The board knew this. The compensation committee signed off on it. And the governance framework that was supposed to catch arrangements like this did not catch it. The boxes were checked, the committees were functioning, and nothing in the formal structure required anyone to ask whether the incentives actually pointed in the right direction.

That is not a governance failure in the abstract. It is a precise, documented betrayal of the people the board existed to protect.

How Boards Fail Without Anyone Noticing

The more insidious problem, in McGee’s view, is not the dramatic governance failure. It is the slow, entirely unremarkable kind that never makes headlines because nothing obviously wrong has occurred.

McGee identified a consistent set of early warning signs. The first: board members who confuse their own importance with actual value creation. Directors who treat their seats as status rather than responsibility.

The second is the rubber-stamp dynamic that emerges when boards defer entirely to advisors rather than applying independent judgment. The scale of that deference is significant: research published by Stanford’s Corporate Governance Research Initiative notes that a negative recommendation from proxy advisory firm ISS on a management proposal can sway as much as 20% of the vote on a given proposal.

But consider what that influence looks like when applied to a situation like the one McGee described above. A board presides over a company whose stock falls more than 99%. Management extracts millions in above-market compensation over the same period. The CEO’s incentive structure is explicitly designed to reward share price destruction. The assets of the company are systematically sold off. All of this is on the public record.

ISS reviewed that record and recommended the reelection of the board anyway, over a qualified turnaround slate that had the legal proxies to win.

That is not a structural critique of proxy advisory influence. It is an example of what that influence costs shareholders when it is applied without adequate judgment. The Stanford stat tells you how much power ISS has over a given vote. This tells you what happens when that power is exercised badly.

What Works

McGee’s prescription is specific and structural. Boards should be evaluated on what they produce, not on how they look. Executive compensation should be tied directly to total shareholder return over defined periods, not benchmarked to peer compensation regardless of outcomes. That single structural change would eliminate much of the incentive architecture that currently rewards underperformance.

Beyond compensation, he says the cultural standard matters as much as the structural one. The founder-led companies that have defined the modern economy did not get there by following every detail of the governance playbook. They got there by being relentlessly focused on growth, willing to be uncomfortable, and unwilling to let scale become an excuse for standing still. Replicating that culture, or protecting it where it exists, is not a governance question. It is a leadership one.

For McGee, there are clear solutions to the silent killer of complacency. Tie pay to outcomes. Put builders in the room. Keep the hunger that built the company from being managed away by the people who arrived after it was already worth protecting. The difficulty is not in understanding it. It is in maintaining it when institutional pressure is pushing in the other direction.

The post Nobul’s Regan McGee on Shareholder Value: “Complacency Is the Silent Killer” appeared first on Green Prophet.

M2PV Capital Targets the American Southwest as Its Launchpad for Off-Grid EV Growth

Bhok Thompson — Fri, 23 Jan 2026 05:52:49 +0000

Solar energy in the Mojave Desert. Credit: Ivanpah, supplied.

The American Southwest is where the EV transition faces its most unforgiving conditions. Extreme heat degrades EV batteries, causing range loss of 15% to over 30% when temperatures exceed 95°F to 100°F. Long travel corridors strain range limits of commuters and long-haul trucks. Grid access remains patchy across vast desert and rural zones. In much of Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, West Texas, and inland California, electric mobility is not constrained by consumer interest, but by infrastructure reality. This is despite these regions being a hub for EV battery production to be close to the source of building lithium batteries.

This is the environment where M2PV Capital is building its business.

The company frames electric mobility infrastructure as requiring more than chargers. It argues that technical precision, grid independence, and operational excellence are essential in regions where traditional infrastructure does not exist. M2PV Capital develops, owns, and operates off-grid EV charging assets through an in-house technical model designed to bypass grid dependence entirely. Micro-grids are the key.

For Southwest communities and transport corridors, that approach addresses a core bottleneck: grid expansion timelines that stretch years beyond mobility demand. M2PV Capital’s strategy is structured around designing energy independence directly into each project.

The company positions its work around locations where conventional developers often hesitate to operate: desert regions, remote corridors, and underserved communities. Where the grid is absent or unreliable, its systems are designed to function independently and perform reliably for decades. This model reflects the Southwest’s physical realities. Solar resources are abundant. Population density is low. Travel distances are long and infrastructure must operate with minimal external support.

An endless American highway. Credit: Pete Alexopoulos

M2PV Capital is currently developing two primary business capabilities: Charging Plazas and power plant development. These projects are intended to demonstrate technical execution while establishing repeatable models for scalable deployment. In practical terms, this means EV charging stations paired with dedicated power assets, allowing each site to operate as an integrated energy system rather than a grid-dependent endpoint.

For Southwest planners and investors, the approach offers a potential blueprint for EV expansion without waiting for large-scale transmission upgrades. That balance is increasingly important as public agencies seek infrastructure models that align climate objectives with regional resilience and fiscal accountability.

M2PV Capital describes its role as building the infrastructure backbone for electric mobility in overlooked markets, combining technical depth, operational ownership, and long-term asset discipline to deliver predictable performance. Green Prophet speaks with M2PV Capital to learn more about opportunities as it tests the ground in the United States, bringing proof-of-concept for regions in Canada where extreme cold is the other side of the same coin, or the Middle East where thousands of miles of relentless desert could be charging station and energy opportunities as the world weans off oil and natural gas.

GREENPROPHET: What is M2PV Capital’s main focus?
M2PV Capital: We develop, own, and operate off-grid EV charging infrastructure in underserved and remote regions where traditional grid access is limited or nonexistent.

Why off-grid?
It allows us to deploy infrastructure where it’s needed most, without waiting for grid expansion. We engineer energy independence into every project.

What business capabilities are you building?
Two core businesses: Charging Plazas for public EV infrastructure and power plant development to generate the energy that powers them independently. Both demonstrate our technical execution and create scalable models.

Why focus on desert and underserved regions?
These areas lack infrastructure but have critical mobility needs. They also require sophisticated engineering—our core strength.

What makes your technical approach different?
Everything is in-house: feasibility analysis, system design, construction oversight, and operations. We control quality and performance at every stage.

How do you ensure long-term asset performance?
Through rigorous upfront planning, robust system design, and continuous operational management. Our assets are built to perform reliably for 20+ years.

What do investors and policymakers gain from this approach?
Confidence. Our projects are technically sound, operationally proven, and financially disciplined. They deliver infrastructure that works and returns that are predictable.

What is the core opportunity you see in the market right now?
We can build power plants rapidly, because we don’t have to wait for grid interconnection (we are off-grid).

This fund aims to reduce downside risk and capitalize on the accelerating EV market by acquiring prime land on which we build off-grid, clean-energy-powered EV charging stations, particularly in the rapidly appreciating desert Southwest. Our differentiation lies in our ability to bypass grid interconnection bottlenecks, enabling faster development and mitigating risks from grid instability, while having a clear path to funding subsequent EV station construction. Because we invest in Opportunity Zones, the gains can be tax free. Creating power generation facilities in areas where the grid is weak or has not reached yet enables industry to co-locate, further increasing the value of the land we invest in.

What types of assets and geographic markets will your fund focus on and why?
Our fund will focus on companies operating in the Southwest United States, specifically land in Opportunity Zones with access to water, highways, and data lines. The Southwest allows us to generate energy at a low cost due to low land cost and high solar irradiation.

How will your fund create value across its portfolio?
By investing in companies that start with low-cost greenfield land and develop energy and transportation infrastructure, we invest in land that increases in value rapidly. While competitors focus on areas with grid connection, our investments can operate slightly outside the range of the grid and generate their own electricity, avoiding competition with large corporations in the current land grab.

Our CEO has 30 years of experience in the solar industry, 10 years in power plant development, five years in batteries, and two years in EV charging stations. He has designed, procured, built, and developed gigawatts of power plants.

Our COO has a background in transportation and logistics as well as EV chargers. We know how to design and build power plants fast.

Our portfolio companies acquire low-cost land and raise its value by creating local infrastructure through EV charging stations for trucks and passenger vehicles. Our strength is the ability to build power infrastructure anywhere.

Why the Southwest comes first

M2PV Capital identifies the Southwest United States as its primary growth region because extreme climate conditions, long travel corridors, and limited grid access create a persistent EV infrastructure gap. While desert regions are a natural fit, the company’s focus extends to any underserved or infrastructure-constrained areas within the region.

Its target audience includes infrastructure- and energy-focused investors, government and regional development decision makers, and participants across the EV and clean energy ecosystem.

Although initial deployments are concentrated in the Southwest, the company’s technical and operational model is designed to be repeatable in similar climates globally. Regions such as the Middle East share many of the same challenges, including extreme heat, remote locations, and the need for energy independence. International markets are viewed as longer-term extensions of the platform rather than immediate priorities.

M2PV Capital frames its five-year outlook around disciplined execution, foundation building, and long-term profitable operation of EV assets.

To reach the company, drop them a line: mmesmer@m2pv.com

::M2PV Capital

The post M2PV Capital Targets the American Southwest as Its Launchpad for Off-Grid EV Growth appeared first on Green Prophet.

Nature as Capital at COP30 and how blended finance and debt-for-nature swaps work

Karin Kloosterman — Wed, 05 Nov 2025 09:05:14 +0000

Jubail mangrove wal in Abu Dhabi

Belém’s COP30 puts forests, freshwater and oceans at center stage. How are emerging markets treating nature as infrastructure— and plugging it into finance and trade. We know that the world has reached the coral tipping point, and as you are busy saving the trees and oceans, know how activists, locals, banks and business can work together. Learn the lingo of finance mechanisms to help save the planet.

Everyone will cover the headlines from the United Nation’s climate conference, this year called COP30 and which is in Belém, Brazil. Fewer will explain the mechanics of how nature becomes cashflow, trade leverage and resilience infrastructure—especially for the Global South. That’s the gap we’re filling. Green Prophet offers a practical question: what instruments exist right now to turn living systems into value chains that stand up to droughts, floods and supply-chain shocks? And how can MENA, Africa and Latin America lead instead of only react.

Know your terminology if you want to follow the conversations in the room

Blended Finance

Econcrete restores coastal habitats with low-cost concrete that mimics a natural shoreline.

Blended finance is the engine room. Public and philanthropic “first-loss” capital de-risks deals; commercial investors come in behind. The aim is to move beyond pilot projects into pipelines that pay for restoration at scale. The World Bank’s recent review shows a surprising depth of activity in nature-based infrastructure, with millions of people already benefiting from coastal and watershed projects that reduce disaster risk while growing local economies.

Let’s take an example we can get behind: Imagine there is huge project to fix a coastline that’s getting destroyed by storms over and over again. We know that planting mangrove trees and building natural barriers to protect homes and schools works. But who pays for this, especially in developing nations like Thailand, where government money might be tight, especially on small islands.

Thailand’s, and Saudi Arabian mangrove forests can help mitigate climate change by keeping rising tides and storms at bay

The problem is that it costs a lot to plant and maintain mangrove trees and natural barriers, and even less natural ones like the ones built by Eco-Concrete in costal areas of New York. There is a lot of good reasons why protecting coastlines are good: tourism, business and stability to invest in a region pay off in the long term.

So how does blended finance work? Big investors might not build a university or a business center in an at-risk area like Indonesia because its islands are at-risk from flooding. They watch as government and charities go first to build pilot projects. These groups take the first losses and are buffered to do so. When investors see a project or pilot is working, the investors and banks can join in.

The end result is that if it’s a project on island resilience, and it’s done well with the local community, the fishermen get more fish, the houses and infrastructure don’t flood, and tourism and businesses in the area improve. Now instead of the government or local municipality working to clean up new disasters as they happen, the community and investors protect a community and its economy.

Where this is doing well:
Indonesia: planting mangroves to protect coasts and create jobs, in Kenya where they are restoring forests to secure water for cities and farms and in Colombia, where they are rebuilding riversides to stop floods and boost tourism. The World Bank found millions of people already benefiting from nature-based projects like these. They’re not just experiments — but are becoming real business pipelines.

Debt for Nature Swaps

Debt-for-nature swaps are also keywords you will hear coming out of COP30 and debt-for-nature is having a moment. By refinancing sovereign debt of a nation and locking savings into conservation endowments, countries can protect mangroves, reefs and forests while improving fiscal stability.

The Bahamas’ swap—backed by private guarantees and insurers—unlocked roughly $124 million for ocean protection and mangrove recovery. Expect more hybrids like “blue bonds,” watershed bonds, and biodiversity-linked notes as COP30 pushes nature up the finance agenda.

Canada is beginning to explore similar nature-finance mechanisms. They are offering grants for businesses that support climate change initiatives. While small island nations pioneered debt-for-nature swaps, the logic applies anywhere natural assets protect economies. Take the St. Lawrence River and the Great Lakes Basin. This is a freshwater system worth trillions in trade, shipping, drinking water, hydropower, and fisheries — yet it faces rising storm surges, coastal erosion, surges in algae blooms, and biodiversity loss.

Imagine a Canadian “watershed bond” modelled on the Bahamas’ blue bond play: federal and provincial governments refinance aging municipal debt in water-adjacent cities like Toronto beaches, Kingston, Thunder Bay, and Windsor. Interest savings are then routed into a protected watershed fund to restore wetlands, rebuild fish nurseries, and reinforce natural floodplains that protect ports and neighborhoods.

Who backs it? Pension funds like CPP Investments, insurers hedging climate risk, and Indigenous-led stewardship trusts that secure long-term governance. Satellite and LiDAR data verify improved water quality, carbon storage, and flood protection — giving investors confidence that nature isn’t just a moral win, but a balance-sheet asset.

Nature Markets

Circle farming in Holland uses AI and nature together.

Nature markets are growing up fast — and not just carbon trading. Investors and governments are starting to put real contracts behind things like restoring habitats, protecting species, and improving fisheries. In the past, these ideas lived in Canva or PowerPoint presentations and pilot projects that didn’t go far beyond the anecdote stage. Today, they’re showing up in legal agreements, budgets, and deal pipelines.

What changed? Measurement tech and startups working in the impact space. We can now track how many fish return to a reef, how much flood damage is avoided when wetlands are restored, or how many species come back when forests regrow. When you can measure nature’s value, you can finance it. Also, investors found that impact companies can return significantly higher returns on investment.

The early winners will be projects that do more than one thing: reduce carbon, protect coasts, boost fishing incomes, create jobs, and improve water security. In short, projects and companies that score high in ESG. Instead of selling just one benefit, they’ll earn money from many revenue streams. The future natural economy isn’t supposed to be about charity — it’s revenue, resilience, and concepts like regenerative agriculture working together.

What to watch at COP30

A Brazil rainforest

Belém in Brazil may be remembered as the summit where nature moved from a side-event to system change. If you are there at the event, Look for bigger blended-finance vehicles for forests and watersheds, standardized biodiversity/ecosystem credit frameworks, clearer guidance on how trade tools like CBAM and deforestation-free rules interact with development and equity goals, and concrete deals in the Amazon and beyond that link restoration to export growth.

Media attention will swirl around politics, but the durable story is finance and how data can turn ecosystems, including jungles and seashore towns, into resilient value-chains.

Explore related coverage on Green Prophet

The post Nature as Capital at COP30 and how blended finance and debt-for-nature swaps work appeared first on Green Prophet.

Charitable Vehicles for Families: Foundations, Funds, and LLCs

Bhok Thompson — Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:24:56 +0000

If you are running an impact charity or a small impact solar energy business, you need to know all the ins and outs of government compliance when you get those grants

Charitable giving isn’t just about dropping extra change in a donation jar or saying “yes” to a prompt at the cash register to tag on a dollar for a good cause. These practices are often categorized as “checkbook” philanthropy because they concern individuals writing a check, so to speak, after they’re prompted with an appeal for donations. This is a noble way for individuals to decide if some of their disposable income might find better use addressing an urgent cause.

But there’s another kind of philanthropy that’s more organized, strategic, and impactful, one that involves choosing a vehicle through which charitable activity is conducted. In this guide, we’ll take a look at three common charitable vehicles, weighing the benefits and tradeoffs of each—private family foundations, donor-advised funds (DAF), and limited liability companies (LLCs) used for philanthropic purposes—so you can determine which vehicle is best suited to put your family’s values into action and build a legacy.

Private Family Foundations

Private foundations are nongovernmental, nonprofit organizations often funded by a single source—typically an individual, family, or corporation. They’re tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3). The Council on Foundations (CoF) reports that around two-thirds of all private foundations are family-managed. This is what people mean when they say “private family foundation,” which isn’t a distinct legal entity from a private foundation, but rather a way a private foundation is managed.

For instance, a private family foundation would be funded by members of one family and remain under the management of at least one family member. According to the CoF, “in many cases, second- and third-generation descendants of the original donors manage the foundation.” This makes the private foundation an ideal charitable vehicle for families who want to make a long-term philanthropic commitment with a deep involvement in how their charitable dollars are spent.

What makes private foundations attractive is the high level of control they offer. Families can define the mission, decide where grants go, hire staff, and manage investments. As for responsibilities, private foundations must distribute at least 5% of their assets annually to charitable purposes. They also must fulfill their administrative requirements, like filing IRS Form 990-PF each year and paying an excise tax on investment income.

Pros:

Control: Full authority over investments, grantmaking, staffing, and mission. Families can determine how assets are managed, what causes to support, and who is involved in the decision-making.
Legacy: Designed for long-term, multi-generational involvement. Successors can be named and integrated into the foundation’s governance, creating continuity between your family’s values and future generations.
Versatility: Foundations support a relatively wide range of charitable activities, including international giving. Private foundations can also run their own programs directly.

Cons:

Cost and Complexity: High upfront costs and ongoing expenses must be expected in private foundations, as well as legal, accounting, and administrative requirements.
Regulatory Burden: Annual filings, detailed reporting, and compliance with distribution rules may become burdensome.
Excise Tax: A 1.39% tax on investment income reduces total funds available for grantmaking. It’s minor, but worth factoring in for long-term planning.

Common Misconception: “Private foundations are a way to shield wealth from taxes indefinitely.” Not quite. Private foundations have to distribute at least 5% of their assets annually and pay an excise tax on investment income. They’re subject to strict IRS regulations, and they’re monitored for compliance.

Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs)

A donor-advised fund (DAF) is a great choice for families who aren’t interested in the administrative and managerial responsibilities of a private foundation. A DAF is an account that allows donors to contribute assets and recommend grants, while the fund is ultimately managed by a sponsoring charity (often a financial institution). In other words, the donor retains advisory power, while the sponsor retains control of the fund.

DAFs are a good fit for families of donors that are looking for simplicity, streamlined recordkeeping (since you don’t need to keep track of every gift acknowledgement), and tax efficiency without losing say in how their contributions could be used. For instance, you could recommend that your donations be used as a source of long-term funding for any IRS-qualified public charity.

Some people enjoy the anonymity that DAFs make possible while donating to causes, but DAFs can also be established in your family’s name. To that end, you can recommend successors to build and maintain a legacy of giving while the sponsoring charity handles all compliance, investments, and distribution. Once a contribution is made to a DAF, you receive an immediate tax deduction.

Pros:

Immediate Tax Deduction: Contributions are deductible in the year they’re made, even if grants are distributed later. That timing flexibility makes DAFs a useful year-end tax planning tool.
Low Maintenance: The sponsoring organization manages compliance, accounting, and investments, which means families don’t have to. There’s also no need to form a separate legal entity or file annual tax returns. It’s as close to hassle-free philanthropy as you can get.
Tax-Free Growth: Assets in a DAF can grow without being taxed, increasing the pool of funds available for future grants.

Cons:

Limited Control: As a donor, you only have advisory power over a DAF. Final decision power rests with the sponsoring charity. Typically, donor recommendations are approved, but there’s no legal guarantee.
No Mandatory Payout: Unlike private foundations, there’s no minimum annual distribution requirement. Funds can sit idle for years unless the donor takes initiative. This makes it easier to delay or avoid actual charitable activity.

Common Misconception: “Aren’t donor-advised funds just tax shelters without any oversight?” DAFs are regulated by the IRS and managed by sponsoring organizations. While donors recommend grants, the charity holds ultimate control over funds, ensuring they’re directed to charitable causes.

LLCs Used for Philanthropic Purposes

Unlike foundations and DAFs, LLCs that are used for philanthropic purposes are not tax-exempt entities. They’re for-profit limited liability structures that some families and high-net-worth individuals use to pursue their goals, like grantmaking, political advocacy, and impact investing, without the constraints of traditional nonprofits. While sometimes informally referred to as “charitable LLCs,” this is a bit misleading—these entities aren’t charities in a legal or tax-exempt sense. What distinguishes them is their ability to blend financial returns with social goals in one flexible platform.

The primary appeal is control and range. LLCs can make grants to nonprofits, fund political campaigns, lobby lawmakers, and make equity investments—all under the same structure. These activities are more constrained under a 501(c)(3) foundation. As such, LLCs are often used by high-net-worth individuals or families who want to engage in more nontraditional and flexible forms of philanthropy.

But this flexibility comes at a tax cost. LLCs are typically taxed as “pass-through” entities, meaning any income the LLC generates is passed directly to owners, shareholders, or investors and reported on the members’ personal tax returns, regardless of whether that income is actually distributed. Likewise, LLCs don’t offer the same upfront tax deductions as the other models. Deductions would only apply if the LLC itself donated to a qualifying charity, not if a contribution was made to the LLC.

Pros:

Flexibility: LLCs aren’t bound by nonprofit restrictions and can engage in lobbying, for-profit investing, and political giving. That makes them a powerful tool for donors who want to influence systems to address philanthropic and business concerns.
Control: Owners retain full operational control without oversight from a board or nonprofit regulator.
Privacy: LLCs don’t have to file public disclosures like Form 990. Salaries, grants, and investments can be kept private, which may appeal to families who value privacy.
Tax Strategy: While not tax-exempt, LLCs offer flexibility in how losses and gains are handled. Impact investment losses can be used to offset other income, while profits can be recycled into future projects.

Cons:

No Upfront Tax Deduction: Donors only receive deductions when the LLC gives to a qualifying 501(c)(3), which adds a step and limits immediate tax benefits. This may be a concern for families with near-term planning needs.
Tax Exposure: Income from the LLC flows through to members and is taxable, even if it isn’t distributed. That means donors could face tax bills on earnings they don’t actually receive.

Common Misconception: “LLCs can’t serve charitable purposes.” They can, just not in the conventional, tax-exempt sense. For philanthropists seeking charitable and commercial impact, the LLC may be the only model that offers both.

Choosing the Right Structure

There’s no “best” charitable vehicle—it depends on your family’s goals, tax situation, and appetite for control and complexity. Private foundations are ideal for families who want to be hands-on, create a lasting legacy, and directly shape how charitable funds are used, but they do require significant administrative work and costs. Donor-advised funds are streamlined, cost-effective, and tax-efficient, but they offer less control and may require donor initiative to maximize charitable outcomes. LLCs offer maximum flexibility and privacy, but they don’t provide the same tax benefits and require more coordination to be effective.

Families often combine structures to meet their needs. For instance, a DAF can support regular grantmaking with minimal effort, while an LLC can handle impact investing or other activities that a traditional nonprofit can’t. As your charitable vision grows or as your interests shift, the vehicles you use can shift too.

Common Misconception: “Once you choose a charitable structure, you’re locked in.” You’re not. Structures can be reconfigured, expanded, or adapted over time to align with new goals or tax strategies.

About the Author

Bo Parfet is Head of Growth at DLP Capital, a 5+ billion-dollar company, and a 3X author, speaker, and mountaineer. He received his MBA from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern and a Master’s Degree in Economics from the University of Michigan. Among his mountaineering adventures, he’s climbed the Seven Summits and K2, and is embarking on an endeavor to ski down Mount Everest to raise money to bring eyesight to 100,000 blind people. He lives with his wife and two sons in Boulder, CO. You can find him on other social media platforms @boparfet.

Disclaimer: Statements are those of Bo Parfet only and are not guaranteed, nor should such statements be relied upon. Forward-looking statements are expressions and beliefs of Bo Parfet and should not be relied upon.

Past performance is not a guarantee or indicator of future results. The information provided is for informational purposes only and does not constitute a recommendation, an offer to sell, or a solicitation to buy. Investment decisions should be made based on your individual financial situation and objectives. Please consult your attorney, tax advisor, or financial professional before making any investment.

The post Charitable Vehicles for Families: Foundations, Funds, and LLCs appeared first on Green Prophet.

EarthX and a blueprint for sustainable investing

Karin Kloosterman — Sat, 12 Jul 2025 11:55:27 +0000

Trammell S. Crow, a Dallas-based businessman and father of four, is focusing his efforts on impact investing, and media that focuses on saving the planet through EarthX.

Smart investment firms know the writing is on the wall: Companies that make the environment count as part of their business model will outperform traditional businesses. It might take a couple of more years but putting sustainability practices first pays off. Recently, investors and bankers have learned that those same traditional businesses that have been profitable for decades may now be a liability as global awareness attunes to human, animal and planet rights.

Whistleblowers are waiting around any corner to derail steady stocks and bonds. How can your family office, bank, venture capital firm or bank steer clear of obstacles and invest in companies that put sustainability first and make planet and people count? Started in Dallas and now global, Trammell S. Crow founded EarthX and through it hosts an annual E-Capital Summit, tying investors and businesses together –- aligning them with the right frame of mind for future-forward business and environmental accountability.

Startups are invited too. Those that have attended the events over the last five years have gone on to raise about $500M in investment capital. It’s like Techcrunch for companies that care about the planet.

This year EarthX hosted its 5th summit. The event brought together policy makers from the White House, The Department of Energy, banks, family offices and traditional companies –– offering case studies and frameworks on how to build businesses that create a sustainability impact from the bottom up –– or from the top down.

“Our vision is to demonstrate to industry leaders from the investment, business, and deal making systems that sustainability and profitability are not mutually exclusive but actually go hand-in-hand.” says Vikram Agrawal, Director of EarthXCapital, the impact investment arm of EarthX.

Vikram Agrawal, EarthX

Some of the topics cover finance innovation in sustainability infrastructure. Few traditional businesses may not realize that the entire solar energy business, for instance, is built on feed-in tariffs and building solar infrastructure for your company can be a new stream of income. Are you managing a family fund and want to create climate-forward investments for your portfolio that are risk averse? Are you running an NGO, green energy business or leading government and city policies on investment in infrastructure? We’ve tapped into one of America’s leading minds on impact investing. Take 5 minutes and dive into what Vikram Agrawal says on how green financing can spur rapid environmental turnaround.

Vikram’s EarthX Capital is run by EarthX, America’s largest environmental expo, conference, film festival, and virtual TV channel, and is a member of IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature. EarthX was founded in 2011 as Earth Day Dallas by environmentalist and businessman Trammell S. Crow.

Samuel Rigu, EarthX Climate Tech Prize 2021 winner and CEO and founder of Safi Organics. Safi has developed a process to manufacture fertiliser using a thermochemical treatment of crop residues such as rice husks; Wang’uru, Kenya.

Green Prophet to Vikram Agrawal: Tell us a little about your background?

Vikram: I am a mission-driven, operationally-focused investment and management professional with an ethos that everyone deserves an opportunity to be successful, however they define success. I have nearly 15 years of experience across several industry sectors in the United States and the emerging markets (Latin America & the Caribbean and emerging Europe, Middle East, & Africa).

I started my career in investment banking and international finance focused on the emerging markets but, over the past seven years, I have been focused on US private equity, having worked with both companies in need of a strategic or operational turnaround as well as those in full-on growth mode.

While developing several investment theses related to sustainability and resiliency, I met Trammell S. Crow, a well-respected Texan environmentalist, businessman, and philanthropist. Trammell founded EarthX, an international environmental nonprofit organization based in Dallas, Texas that is dedicated to educating and inspiring people and organizations to take action towards a more sustainable future.

Trammell and I decided to partner together where I would have a dual mandate. I am launching a private investment firm focused on sustainability & resilience-related companies. In addition, I am helping lead the EarthxCapital team which has a mission to develop an investment, business, innovation, and deal-making ecosystem focused on leading and catalyzing impact and action.

My passion for sustainability, conservation, and resiliency started when I was young. It fully blossomed nearly twenty years ago when I had the opportunity to work on sustainability initiatives in rural India. I witnessed how solar energy installations, water conservation, and better agricultural practices could drastically improve people’s lives and provide them with critical resources that I took for granted growing up here in the United States.

Since then, I have realized that sustainability is not only important for the earth, for environmental justice, and for tackling broader social challenges –– including creating millions of much-needed jobs. I realize that sustainability is critical for business and investments by driving profitability, enhancing value, and driving risk-adjusted returns.

Why do we need such an event, and why now?

In April 2021, we hosted the 5th annual invitation-only E-Capital Summit. EarthxCapital’s signature event of the year seeks to convene, inspire, and catalyze action from hundreds of global investment firms, early to late-stage innovators, established global companies, industry leaders, policymakers, incubators & accelerators, dealmakers, and researchers. Our objective is to have substantial, positive impacts on investments, businesses, people and our planet.

In a highly polarized society that is dominated by misinformation, we take great pride in convening a diverse group of individuals and organizations representing a diverse group of perspectives in the middle of America: Dallas, Texas. We actively seek all perspectives and civil (and well-informed) discourse from all parties, regardless of the industry or profession you represent or whether you are a Democrat or Republican, climate change believer or denier, pure capitalist or philanthropist. We urgently need to have more inclusive debates with opposing views where we learn to collaborate and value each other’s diverse perspectives to better develop solutions.

What we all need to realize is that a majority of us share similar values and goals and that it will take a holistic solution from the investment, business, policy, research, civic, and non-profit communities partnering together to solve short-term and long-term challenges. At the end of the day, we all want clean water & air, a resilient economy and supply chains, jobs for millions of Americans, power & energy, and a better future for generations to come.

However, being sustainable is trending and sexy today. Don’t get me wrong: this is great but it could also lead to “greenwashing” and have negative implications if investors lose capital, like they did a decade ago in the last cleantech bubble, especially if the public markets’ “ESG play” falters.

Many traditional investors and businesses are wary of this but will continue to do what they can to “check the box” if large investors and consumers demand this. Therefore, to truly have sustainable sustainability, it’s critical to show how sustainability and profitability are not mutually exclusive, but in fact go hand-in-hand. It’s our mission to show how sustainability can improve a company’s profitability, improve resiliency, and create a greater Strategic Value Proposition thereby enhancing value and increasing risk-adjusted returns.

How is the investment climate different under Biden?

Even prior to President Biden being sworn in as President, there was significant interest in sustainability investing. The International Finance Corporation, a World Bank Group, estimates that in 2020, ~$2.1 trillion AUM of a total of $10 trillion AUM was focused on impact investing in private markets.

However, President Biden is providing guardrails for sustainability investing through his fiscal policy and regulatory agenda. For example, billions of dollars in the infrastructure bill will support many cleantech and sustainability-related initiatives including EV infrastructure, energy/power grid resilience, and water infrastructure. Unfortunately, investors will be wary of such changes (especially if they are done via Executive Order or without bipartisan support), as they could be easily undone by a new Administration.

It remains unclear what the Biden Administration’s impact will be on sustainability investing but I’d bet most people would say that it will have a very positive short-term and long-term effect.

How has Covid changed anything in Impact investing?

First off, please allow me to offer my condolences and thoughts with the millions of people around the world who were impacted by COVID-19 and the global pandemic, which continues to ravage on. Unfortunately, millions of people around the world lost their lives and an even greater number of people will be impacted for years to come due to various economic, social, and health – physical and mental – challenges. We will need to develop innovative solutions to overcome those challenges.

To answer your question, impact investing can mean different things depending on who you ask. For the purpose of our discussion today, I’ll be focusing on environmental sustainability related issues given the focus of EarthX; however, that doesn’t diminish the importance of many other critical topics and challenges that are being addressed by a variety of impact investors including Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; inequality and justice; health and wellness; access to education, and many more.

The pandemic highlighted the importance of resilience but also magnified the global inequalities and challenges faced by many daily, many of which are addressed by the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). From a COVID-19 prevention and treatment perspective, millions of people do not have access to clean drinking water – or even water to wash your hands – nor do they have access to proper nutrition (giving your body and its immune system to fight a virus).

These are only a few examples of the many investment opportunities that comprise the $2.5 trillion annual financing gap needed to achieve the SDGs. Many investors have responded by focusing their investment and philanthropic endeavors in underserved communities and look to be creative in finding opportunities to address these challenges. Given Covid-19, there may be greater emphasis, which is very much needed, on topics and investment theses related to environmental justice and health and wellness.

Can you give us three trends to look out for in the coming year?

Tension between greenwashing and defining what sustainability means

It seems like every week we hear an announcement from a major financial institution or corporate leader on their massive investment or pledge towards a new ESG or sustainability-focused strategy.

As an environmentalist, I’m excited to see the news every week but am wary if such announcements will convince traditional investors and businesses to execute long-lasting strategies. For example, I see this challenge with carbon offsets. First, I’d argue that carbon or GHG footprint reductions by operational or business plan improvements are in fact better than carbon offsets from unrelated sources.

Footprint reductions are permanent solutions and can hopefully be good for business profitability, which also leaves more offsets for other essential businesses unable to change operationally or a stronger foundation to rebuild the environment. Second, as Bloomberg has reported before, there aren’t enough trees (or land) in the world to support these continued statements. Therefore, to preserve credibility we must address true measures to address sustainability, but what does “sustainability” actually mean?

I always joke that if you ask five different people what sustainability means, you get ten different answers. However, as major institutional investors and public/private asset managers continue to employ and pledge trillions dollars of assets towards “sustainability” investment strategies, it will be important to define what constitutes sustainability.

As a pragmatist, and as a newly adopted Texan, I am excited to highlight how traditional energy companies are making oil and gas operations more sustainable. Oil and gas is critical to our economy, employs millions of Americans, and is a valuable resource for multiple end-products. While still holding the industry accountable for its actions, we should bring them to the table and celebrate their efforts, not shun them.

However, I’m sure many of your readers and many of my friends are raising their eyebrows as I put sustainability and oil and gas in the same sentence. So I ask, is making oil and gas a more environmentally-friendly sustainability strategy? I think so but others may disagree.

Developing measurable metrics

In addition, it will be important to identify standardized specific and quantifiable metrics, both of which have inhibited acceptance among traditional investors. The Biden Administration has already started to broach this issue and I’d expect some critical discussion in the coming months.

For example, the Wall Street Journal has done great coverage on this subject especially looking at companies deemed to be ESG top-performers and how various rating agencies ranked these companies differently on their sustainability scorecard due to differing metrics. Investors and businesses prefer standardization and certainty. It’s hard to plan if the goal line keeps moving.

Resilience

Resilience is the new buzz word and will be one of the most important topics for discussion across industry verticals globally. As with sustainability, resilience will become a dominant discussion topic especially as individuals and businesses grapple with increasing disruptions related to everyday activities.

A recent conversation with a major US city’s Chief Resilience Officer reminded me how resilience encompasses a broad range of issues. However, my current focus is on environmental and severe adverse weather resilience. COVID-19 and the recent February winter storms highlighted how ill-prepared our mission-critical industries are to shocks to the system.

As we begin to recover from COVID-19, I expect this to be a topic at more dining room tables, in more boardrooms, and in the halls of Washington, DC.

What kinds of businesses are most at risk if they don’t start to think “impact”?

Not to sound cliché, but every single business will be at risk. However, it will not be a one-size fits all strategy. For example, climate change and severe adverse weather events will have an impact on critical infrastructure assets, global supply chains, and the built environment. Not only will key industries like power, water, and food/ag be impacted (thereby challenging millions of Americans and billions of humans around the world), severe adverse weathers will affect all industries.

Mother Nature doesn’t know the difference between Blue and Red states. According to the NOAA, over the past 40 years, the United States has had more than 250 severe adverse weather events that have caused more than a billion dollars of damage (inflation adjusted) totaling more than $1.7 trillion… important to note that this doesn’t even include the hundreds of other “smaller” severe adverse weather events that happen each year across the country. This has a direct financial impact on insurance companies and businesses seeking access to insurance and capital.

From a finance perspective, it feels like every week you hear of another international financial institution that proclaims their intention to limit their exposure to fossil fuels, thereby increasing the cost of capital for companies with high exposure to such resources. With increased costs of capital, the energy industry will face reduced returns and capital expenditures thereby increasing the cost of traditional energy.

This, interestingly enough, could make alternative fuels and sustainable forms of energy more attractive from a cost competitiveness basis thereby giving them sufficient time to mature and increasing long-term competitiveness as compared (think of the drop in cost per unit of energy from solar and wind technology given increased adoption over the past two decades).

Can you give us an example of innovation in sustainability investing? I brought up the idea of solar and feed-in tariffs, can you give another?

I’ve learned that one of the greatest challenges for sustainability investing is the lack of patient capital for truly innovative enterprises. Unlike other innovations or industries, many clean technology and sustainability-related solutions take time to develop, commercialize, and eventually drive a return.

In addition, unfortunately, political gridlock has also inhibited private and public capital inflows for solving less sexy sustainability-related issues like infrastructure. Therefore, as I have learned of different forms of “innovation” in sustainability investing I’ve been impressed by many organizations that are looking to solve those problems. However, two firms – both past E-Capital panelists – with innovative financing models have come to mind:

Prime Coalition is a 501(c)(3) public charity that partners with mission-aligned investors to support extraordinary companies that combat climate change, have a high likelihood of achieving commercial success, and would otherwise have a difficult time raising adequate financial support to scale. Prime has leveraged catalytic capital, including grants and program-related investments, to drive much needed investment in innovative companies from patient and risk-tolerant capital providers. Most importantly, they don’t look to sacrifice returns while supporting industry game-changers.

Quantified Ventures is leading outcomes-based financing solutions across the country, solutions very much needed to solve our country’s environmental and aging infrastructure crisis. The firm is credited with structuring the first ever Environmental Impact Bond in the United States for DC Water, which helped them solve several challenges. DC Water was able to implement green infrastructure through an approach that shared performance risk with investors by linking their returns to the project’s success. I expect an increase of these forms of investment/financial structures throughout the country.

If you had unlimited capital, where would you put it first? 3 ideas — you have access to a magic genie

I think this is a better question for folks who are much smarter and more experienced than me (and with a lot more capital)! However, based on my experience, the following examples could be some of the greatest opportunities (in addition to the themes I’ve mentioned previously like resilience which I’ve been thinking about for several years now):

Sustainable Solutions for traditional industry

Although we like to focus on easily marketable and identifiable sustainability initiatives (like replacing plastic straws), true fundamental changes to consumer or business behavior will be needed to move the needle.

For example, investing in corporate sustainability and resilience is great for business and investments by improving profitability, strengthening business resilience, creating a greater Strategic Value Proposition, and enhancing value for all stakeholders thereby increasing risk-adjusted returns.

Inflation adjusted, the US economy has grown ~2% over the past 20 years and ~3% since World War II, however no investor or business would deem that as a high ROI for an individual investment. Therefore, if top-line growth is focused to be so low, then significant measures need to be taken to improve gross margins and operating margins, thereby improving net profit margins.

These initiatives (like the Circular Economy) can be good for business but also great for people and the environment, especially when they concern efficient use of materials and critical resources like energy and water. McKinsey & Company has done several studies that support how sustainability and profitability can go hand-in-hand. If I had unlimited capital I’d be targeting these areas as the opportunities are endless and can help sway traditional businesses and investors to implement simple measures.

Supply chains for leading innovators

Everyone likes to highlight the business and financial success of industry-leading sustainability innovators like Tesla, Chargepoint, AppHarvest, NextEra Energy, and point to them as the best sustainability-focused investment opportunities. That could be true, but I think you also need to focus on the incredibly diverse set of companies that are needed to support these large enterprises and their supply chains.

If we expect growth in any of the sustainability-focused end markets, capital (and patience) will be needed for those businesses that are supporting sustainability innovation and completely new industries.

EV Infrastructure and energy storage

Regarding an industry-specific opportunity, I believe that Mobility, in particular EVs, is one of the hottest sectors for the public and private investment markets. Now, before I start greenwashing you, let’s be reminded that EV cars only represent ~2% of the US car market today. However, this is a significant increase from the past decade where some reports put market share at less than 0.2%!

Earlier this year, California announced that all new car sales will need to be electric by 2035. As published in the journal Nature Climate Change, University of Toronto researchers found that 90% of US cars would need to be electric by 2050 to meet stated climate goals.

However, according to a Deloitte consumer auto study, the greatest concern for 54% of Americans was the perceived shorter driving range and lack of EV charging infrastructure. If investment professionals, policy makers and the auto industry hope to capitalize on the tremendous environmental, business, and investment opportunity, this issue must be addressed. We need greater EV infrastructure to support the increase in EV unless you think Green Hydrogen is a more realistic proposition.

::EarthX

The post EarthX and a blueprint for sustainable investing appeared first on Green Prophet.

Werner Lanthaler Reveals Why Wlanholding Avoids Traditional VC Models

Bhok Thompson — Tue, 17 Jun 2025 04:55:04 +0000

Most life sciences investors follow predictable patterns: raise funds from limited partners, deploy capital across portfolio companies within defined timeframes, and exit investments to generate returns for fund investors. Werner Lanthaler has deliberately constructed Wlanholding GmbH to operate outside these conventional frameworks, creating what amounts to an alternative approach to biotechnology investment.

As founder and CEO of Wlanholding, a family office focused on life sciences and high-tech sustainability investments, Lanthaler has designed his investment platform to prioritize long-term value creation over the rapid return cycles that characterize traditional venture capital. This approach reflects the lessons he learned during his tenure as CEO of Evotec SE, where he experienced firsthand how external investor timelines can sometimes conflict with the lengthy development periods necessary for pioneering biotechnology innovation.

The contrast becomes apparent when examining Wlanholding’s portfolio companies: Proxygen GmbH developing molecular glue degraders, Cerabyte GmbH creating ceramic-based data storage solutions, Solgate GmbH targeting complex protein families, Planet Pure GmbH producing organic consumer products, and Cyment developing sustainable building materials. Each represents ambitious science that benefits from patient capital rather than pressure to achieve rapid milestones for fund reporting purposes.

Family Office Structure Creates Different Investment Dynamics

Wlanholding operates as a family office rather than a traditional venture capital fund, creating fundamentally different relationships between the investment platform and portfolio companies. This structure eliminates many of the tensions between investor reporting requirements and company development needs that can complicate traditional VC relationships.

Family office investment decisions can focus on scientific merit and long-term market potential rather than fund marketing requirements or limited partner expectations. This freedom allows Wlanholding to invest in companies that traditional VC funds might consider too early-stage, too technically complex, or too specialized for their portfolio construction needs.

The family office structure also enables more flexible deal terms and ongoing support arrangements. Without pressure to demonstrate rapid progress to external fund investors, Wlanholding can provide sustained support through the inevitable setbacks and strategic pivots that characterize biotechnology development. This stability often proves crucial for companies developing novel technologies that don’t follow predictable development timelines.

The operational implications extend to board participation and strategic guidance. Rather than managing relationships with dozens of portfolio companies to satisfy fund diversification requirements, the family office structure enables deeper engagement with a more concentrated portfolio of companies where meaningful value creation support is possible.

Extended Investment Timelines Enable Ambitious Science

Traditional venture capital funds typically operate on 7-10 year cycles with pressure to generate returns within predetermined timeframes. Wlanholding operates without these artificial constraints, enabling investment in companies pursuing scientific objectives that may require extended development periods to reach their full potential.

This extended timeline approach proves particularly valuable for companies that are developing platform technologies rather than single-product applications. Solgate’s focus on solute carrier proteins is an example of the kind of ambitious science that benefits from patient capital. These proteins represent a large class of therapeutic targets that have been historically challenging to address, requiring sustained research efforts and iterative development approaches that don’t fit neatly into traditional VC timelines.

The patient capital philosophy extends to supporting companies through multiple development phases and market applications. Rather than pressuring portfolio companies to pursue exits at the first viable opportunity, Wlanholding evaluates whether continued investment and support can create significantly greater long-term value by enabling companies to capture larger market opportunities or develop additional applications for their core technologies.

Concentrated Portfolio Approach Over Diversification Models

Traditional venture capital follows portfolio construction models designed to generate returns through a small number of highly successful investments that compensate for multiple failures or modest successes. This approach requires VCs to make numerous investments with limited resources available for deep engagement with individual companies.

Werner Lanthaler has built Wlanholding around a concentrated portfolio approach that enables deeper engagement with each investment. Rather than spreading capital across dozens of companies with limited attention available for each, the concentrated approach enables meaningful partnership relationships that can significantly influence company development outcomes.

This concentrated investment strategy requires higher conviction in investment decisions but creates opportunities for more substantial support during critical development phases. The approach aligns well with the complex, relationship-intensive nature of biotechnology innovation, where strategic partnerships and deep domain expertise often determine success more than capital availability alone.

The concentrated approach also enables better integration between portfolio companies, facilitating knowledge sharing and collaborative development opportunities that larger, more diversified portfolios cannot easily coordinate. Companies like Proxygen and Cerabyte can benefit from shared insights and complementary expertise that emerge from closer portfolio integration.

Active Partnership Beyond Financial Investment

Traditional venture capital relationships often involve providing capital in exchange for board representation and periodic monitoring, with limited operational involvement beyond major strategic decisions. Wlanholding’s approach emphasizes active partnership and operational support that leverages Lanthaler’s extensive industry experience and professional network.

This active partnership approach draws on his experience building Evotec from approximately 200 employees to over 5,000 while expanding revenue from €40 million to €800 million. Portfolio companies benefit from strategic guidance based on direct experience with scaling biotechnology companies, navigating regulatory processes, and developing strategic partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions.

The active partnership involves hands-on problem-solving during critical development phases. Rather than simply monitoring progress through board meetings and investor updates, Wlanholding engages directly with portfolio companies to overcome technical challenges, navigate regulatory complexities, and develop strategic partnerships. This level of involvement often proves essential for companies developing breakthrough technologies that require specialized expertise and industry relationships.

Long-Term Value Creation Over Rapid Exit Strategies

Traditional VC models prioritize generating returns within fund timelines, creating pressure for portfolio companies to pursue exit opportunities that may not optimize long-term value creation. Wlanholding’s approach emphasizes building sustainable competitive advantages and market positions that create lasting value, even if this requires longer development timelines.

This long-term orientation allows portfolio companies to build robust scientific foundations, develop multiple product applications, and establish market positions that support sustained growth rather than optimizing for quick exits. Cerabyte’s development of revolutionary data storage technology exemplifies this approach, pursuing ambitious technical objectives that may take years to fully commercialize but could create substantial long-term value.

The long-term approach extends to supporting companies through multiple growth phases and market expansions. Rather than exiting when companies achieve initial success, Wlanholding evaluates whether continued investment can enable companies to capture significantly larger opportunities by expanding into adjacent markets or developing additional applications for their core technologies.

Scientific Expertise Drives Investment Decisions

Traditional venture capital often relies on pattern recognition and financial analysis to evaluate investment opportunities, with limited deep scientific expertise in specific technology areas. However, Werner Lanthaler brings extensive domain knowledge from his experience in biotechnology development, enabling more sophisticated technical evaluation of investment opportunities.

This scientific expertise allows Wlanholding to identify promising opportunities that traditional VCs might overlook due to technical complexity or unfamiliarity with specific scientific domains. Companies developing advanced platform technologies, addressing difficult biological targets, or pursuing novel therapeutic approaches benefit from investors who understand the technical merits and development challenges rather than relying primarily on market comparisons.

The scientific expertise also enables more effective ongoing support and strategic guidance. Lanthaler can provide insights based on direct experience with similar technical challenges, regulatory requirements, and commercial development pathways rather than generic business development advice that characterizes many traditional VC relationships.

Risk Management Through Deep Domain Understanding

Rather than managing investment risk through portfolio diversification alone, Wlanholding’s approach emphasizes a deep understanding of the scientific and technical risks associated with each investment. This domain expertise enables more accurate risk assessment and more effective risk mitigation strategies than traditional portfolio construction approaches.

The risk management approach considers the specific technical challenges, regulatory pathways, and market development requirements associated with each company’s approach. Rather than applying generic risk models across diverse investments, the deep domain understanding enables tailored support strategies that address the most critical success factors for each portfolio company.

This sophisticated risk assessment extends to strategic partnership development and competitive analysis. Understanding the technical differentiation and competitive advantages of portfolio companies enables more effective positioning for strategic partnerships, acquisition opportunities, and market development initiatives.

Through his alternative approach to biotechnology investment, Werner Lanthaler has created an investment platform that is uniquely positioned to support the most ambitious scientific innovations while generating sustainable returns for all stakeholders. Wlanholding’s model shows how alternative investment structures can better serve both entrepreneurs and investors in complex, technology-intensive industries that require patient capital and deep domain expertise.

The success of this approach suggests opportunities for evolution in how life sciences innovation is funded and supported, moving beyond standardized VC models towards more flexible structures that align investor capabilities with the specific requirements of breakthrough biotechnology development.

The post Werner Lanthaler Reveals Why Wlanholding Avoids Traditional VC Models appeared first on Green Prophet.

AI and the Accelerate 2050 conference

Julie Steinbeck — Sun, 23 Feb 2025 07:40:39 +0000

Singapore’s Super Tree Grove at Gardens by the Bay. Is this the future of cities?

Artificial Intelligence, or AI, has the power to transform our world, helping farmers plant seeds and water plants at the right time. It can help develop solutions in renewable energy so we can scale climate solutions that help wean the world off oil and plastics. But when it comes to AI, we need some kind of global consensus on a couple of things: what do we define is “good” for the planet, and what do we want the future to look like? Global leaders are coming together these questions and fresh challenges and opportunities in AI.

This event announcement comes off the heels of an AI and the planet UN project that includes 193 UNESCO signatories –– with some of the countries being the most violent on earth. Now is the time to wake up stakeholders to build the foundations of AI so we can truly use it for good.

The Accelerate 2050 conference in Brindisi, Italy, brings together visionaries, innovators, and leaders to address global challenges in AI. One of the key focus areas is AI for Good, leveraging artificial intelligence to solve pressing societal and environmental issues. This initiative is not just about technology but about creating a positive impact on humanity and the planet.

The conferences bring together experts from various sectors—including investors, companies, consultants, non-profits, and government officials—to discuss and promote sustainable practices and innovations.

Key Features of Accelerate 2050 Conferences:

The conferences cover a range of topics such as climate technology, renewable energy, carbon markets, biodiversity, impact investing, and the role of artificial intelligence in promoting sustainability. Events have been held in multiple locations, including New York City and Santa Monica, California. For instance, the New York event took place on May 8-9, 2024, at the New York Society for Ethical Culture Building. The Santa Monica event was held on November 6-7, 2024, at the Expert Dojo.

One of the topics is AI for Good which refers to the ethical and responsible use of artificial intelligence to tackle challenges like climate change, poverty, healthcare accessibility, and more. It emphasizes using AI not just for profit but to improve lives and promote sustainability. This includes:

Environmental Conservation: AI models to monitor biodiversity and carbon emissions.
Social Impact: Enhancing education, healthcare, and community development.
Ethical AI: Ensuring transparency, fairness, and accountability in AI systems.

How Other Generations and Skill Sets Can Contribute

AI for Good isn’t just for the tech-savvy; it requires diverse experiences and interdisciplinary approaches. Here’s how people from different generations and backgrounds can participate:

Mentoring and Leadership:Experienced professionals can mentor young AI enthusiasts, guiding them on ethical considerations and societal impacts.

Policy and Ethics:Those with backgrounds in law, sociology, or public policy can contribute to creating ethical frameworks and guidelines for AI deployment.

Creatives and Communicators: Designers, writers, and educators are needed to make AI solutions accessible and understandable to non-technical audiences. Storytelling and communication strategies can help raise awareness about the impact of AI for Good.

The meeting provides a great chance to network with people in AI who share similar goals. Some of the confirmed speakers include:

Vanessa Adams – Level4International
A consultant service that focuses on international development, aiming to drive social impact and sustainability.
Saeed Al Dhaheri – AI UNESCO / AI Ethicist
Specializes in AI ethics, ensuring responsible AI deployment globally.
Niclas Andersson – Untap
A water from air business.
Fiona Banister – Decarbonized.org
Advocates for environmental sustainability through decarbonization initiatives.
Brian Bartholomeusz – Stanford – TomKat Center
Leads efforts in energy innovation and tech transfer at Stanford University.
Karl Burkart – One Earth (Invited)
Focuses on environmental sustainability, leveraging technology for conservation.
Michael Capponi – GEM
Leads global empowerment and humanitarian aid initiatives. Global Empowerment Mission was formed in response to the 2010 Haiti Earthquake to deliver the most amount of aid, to the most amount of people in need, in the shortest amount of time and with the least amount of costs to donors.
Claudia D’Andrea – Tetra Tech
Tetra Tech is a global consulting and engineering services firm that provides a wide range of services related to environmental, infrastructure, and energy sectors.
Edivando Vitor do Couto – Alteromani
Focuses on renewable energy and sustainable solutions.
Jillian Dyszynski – American Forest Foundation
Works on environmental conservation and forestry initiatives.
Gene Eidelman – Azure Printed Homes
Pioneers sustainable housing solutions using advanced manufacturing techniques.
Brian Fairhurst – Anthropogenic
Utilizes advanced impact intelligence to address environmental challenges.

For more information about upcoming events, speakers, and registration details, you can visit the official Accelerate 2050 website.

The post AI and the Accelerate 2050 conference appeared first on Green Prophet.

How the mobility scooter industry is tackling carbon emissions

Bhok Thompson — Fri, 21 Feb 2025 13:17:27 +0000

Mooncool electric trike for seniors and people who need the stability of 3 wheels

The mobility scooter market is increasingly focused on addressing carbon emissions and enhancing environmental sustainability. As the demand for mobility solutions grows, especially among the ageing population, the industry is taking steps to minimise its environmental impact. Here we provide a breakdown of how the mobility scooter market is tackling carbon emissions.

Electric Power and Zero Emissions

Electric-Only Operation: Mobility scooters are predominantly electric, meaning they produce zero exhaust emissions during use. This is a major advantage over fossil fuel-powered vehicles, contributing to reduced air pollution in urban areas.
Battery Advancements: The shift from traditional lead-acid batteries to more efficient lithium-ion batteries is underway. Lithium-ion batteries offer better energy density, longer life cycles and faster charging times, which collectively reduce the environmental footprint by enhancing energy efficiency and reducing waste.

Sustainable Manufacturing Practices

Eco-Friendly Materials: Manufacturers are increasingly using sustainable materials in scooter production. This includes recyclable plastics and metals, which help lower the environmental impact associated with raw material extraction and processing.
Energy-Efficient Production: Efforts are being made to adopt energy-efficient manufacturing processes, which can significantly reduce carbon emissions. This includes optimising supply chains, reducing waste and implementing cleaner production technologies.

Lifecycle Emissions and Recycling

Comprehensive Emissions Assessment: To fully understand the carbon footprint of mobility scooters, it is important to consider lifecycle emissions, which include emissions from manufacturing, operation and disposal. The industry is working towards minimising emissions at each stage of the lifecycle.
Battery Recycling Initiatives: Proper recycling and disposal of batteries are crucial for reducing lifecycle emissions. Manufacturers are developing return initiatives and recycling schemes to ensure that batteries and other components are disposed of responsibly and materials are reused where possible.

Renewable Energy Integration

Solar Charging Solutions: Some mobility scooters are being designed with solar charging capabilities, allowing users to harness renewable energy. This reduces reliance on grid electricity and promotes the use of clean energy sources.
Green Energy Partnership: Manufacturers are exploring partnerships with renewable energy providers to offer green charging solutions, further reducing the carbon footprint associated with electricity consumption.

Regulatory and Market Drivers

Government Incentives: The UK government is offering incentives for the development and adoption of low-emission technologies. This includes grants, tax breaks and subsidies for manufacturers and consumers, encouraging the production and purchase of environmentally friendly mobility scooters.
Consumer Demand: As consumers become more environmentally conscious, there is growing demand for sustainable mobility solutions. This market pressure is driving manufacturers to innovate and prioritise carbon reduction in their product offerings.

Urban Infrastructure and Integration

Smart City Initiatives: As part of wider smart city initiatives, the UK is investing in infrastructure that supports electric mobility, including charging stations and dedicated lanes for mobility scooters. This integration helps reduce emissions by promoting the use of electric vehicles over traditional ones.

The mobility scooter market is actively working to reduce carbon emissions through advancements in electric power, sustainable manufacturing practices and renewable energy integration. By focusing on lifecycle emissions and responding to regulatory and market drivers, the industry aims to provide environmentally friendly mobility solutions that meet the needs of users while contributing to a more sustainable future. As these efforts continue, mobility scooters will play an increasingly important role in reducing urban carbon emissions and promoting cleaner, greener transportation options in the UK.

The post How the mobility scooter industry is tackling carbon emissions appeared first on Green Prophet.

Why Neobanks Are the Future of Sustainable Finance

Bhok Thompson — Mon, 17 Feb 2025 14:39:49 +0000

In an era where sustainability is no longer just a buzzword but a business imperative, neobanks—digital-only banks—are emerging as an eco-friendly alternative to traditional banking institutions. With their paperless operations, reduced carbon footprints, and commitment to ethical investing, neobanks are redefining the financial industry by aligning with the values of environmentally-conscious consumers.

The Environmental Toll of Traditional Banking

Brick-and-mortar banks have long been part of the global financial landscape, and there is comfort meeting with bank tellers here and there especially if you are about to sign on for a 25-year mortgage, but their environmental impact is significant. And you don’t need one most of the time. From energy-intensive office buildings to paper-heavy processes, traditional banks leave a substantial carbon footprint.

According to estimates, the global banking sector contributes significantly to emissions due to:

Branch Operations: Large physical branches require energy for lighting, heating, and cooling, adding to carbon emissions.

Paper Usage: Traditional banks still rely on paper for contracts, statements, and application forms, leading to deforestation.

Fossil Fuel Investments: Many large banks finance industries with high carbon emissions, including oil, gas, and mining.

Neobanks: A Digital-First, Eco-Friendly Alternative

Unlike conventional banks, neobanks operate entirely online or via mobile apps. This shift eliminates the need for physical branches, reducing energy consumption and real estate-related emissions. Here’s how they contribute to sustainability:

Paperless Banking

Neobanks replace paper-based processes with digital documentation. Account opening, statements, and transactions occur within apps, reducing paper waste and cutting down on deforestation.

Lower Energy Consumption

Since neobanks lack physical locations, they do not require office buildings, ATMs, or large-scale data centers. Instead, they rely on cloud computing, which, when optimized, is significantly more energy-efficient than maintaining bank branches across multiple cities.

Ethical and Green Investing

Many neobanks differentiate themselves by offering ethical banking options, refusing to fund fossil fuel projects, and investing in sustainable industries. For example, banks like Aspiration and Tomorrow Bank pledge to fund renewable energy projects and plant trees based on user transactions.

Carbon Footprint Transparency

Some neobanks go beyond being neutral and actively encourage customers to make eco-friendly financial choices. Apps like Bunq and Revolut provide carbon footprint tracking for purchases, enabling users to see how their spending habits impact the planet.

Incentivizing Sustainable Purchases

Neobanks often partner with green businesses to offer rewards for eco-friendly spending. Cashback incentives for shopping at sustainable brands or donations to environmental causes with every transaction make green choices more appealing.

The Future of Green Banking

As consumers grow increasingly concerned about sustainability, the banking sector is shifting toward greener banking alternatives. Neobanks are leading this charge by leveraging technology, reducing waste, and aligning their investments with environmentally responsible initiatives. Their success signals a broader movement where financial institutions are expected to be as conscious of their impact on the planet as they are about their bottom line.

By choosing a neobank, consumers are not only simplifying their financial lives but also making a direct contribution to a more sustainable future. The next era of banking isn’t just digital—it’s green.

Neobanks may be useful for some people at some periods of their lives but as children happen and investing becomes part of a household, regular brick and mortar banks have their place. Perhaps some hybrid of both forms will form the future of banking.

Some successful neobanks in the U.S. include:

Chime – One of the most popular neobanks, known for its no-fee banking, early paycheck access, and automatic savings features.
Varo Bank – The first U.S. neobank to receive a national bank charter, offering high-yield savings and no overdraft fees.
Aspiration – A sustainability-focused neobank that funds reforestation projects and avoids fossil fuel investments.
Current – Focuses on faster direct deposits, cashback rewards, and budgeting tools.
SoFi – Originally a student loan refinancing company, SoFi now offers banking services with high-yield savings and investment options.

The post Why Neobanks Are the Future of Sustainable Finance appeared first on Green Prophet.

Why ESG Investing and Green Forex Are the Future of Finance

Bhok Thompson — Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:46:30 +0000

Saudi Aramco is building a mile-long futuristic “sustainable” city built with billions in investment. Is it sustainable though?

Discover how sustainable investing and Green Forex can transform finance. Learn how ESG factors influence currency stability for a greener future.

Sustainable investing, which was once a niche concept, has now become a mainstream financial strategy. Today’s investors understand and value environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors more than ever, making them key considerations in allocating their assets. This change comes from two main factors: clients increasingly want their investments to align with their values, and there’s growing recognition that sustainable practices can lead to better long-term financial results.

What Are Sustainable Investing and Green Forex Strategies?

Sustainable investing means investing in companies that follow ethical and responsible practices, which helps them operate more environmentally and socially consciously. The fundamental purpose behind sustainable investing revolves around using financial resources to drive positive societal changes and benefits. Investors have various options, including buying shares in companies producing solar panels or biofuels or joining community loan funds.

The three main subheadings under sustainable investing represent various investment areas in this field.

Environmental investments evaluate companies’ management of non-renewable resources and their approach to climate issues and clean energy transitions.
The social component of sustainable investing examines initiatives that address human rights issues and diversity concerns. These topics cover both gender equality and support for underprivileged communities.
The governance element of sustainable investing evaluates companies that promote business ethics alongside trust, transparency, and marketplace compliance. These businesses prioritize ethical practices above all else while treating profits as a secondary goal within their organizational structure.

Sustainable investment has also influenced the forex market by creating “Green Forex.” This foreign exchange form is growing on MT4 trading platforms. Why? Investors now assess ESG factors when evaluating currency strength because countries with eco-friendly policies often experience improved currency stability.

According to an IISD publication by David Uzsoki, in 2036, nearly all global assets under management could incorporate ESG principles. Sustainable investing and Green Forex could play a pivotal role in the future of finance. Let’s find out more.

Invest in agriculture

The Rise of Sustainable Investing, Market Expansion, and Growth Trends

According to MSCI, ESG Investing began back in the 1960s. However, during that era, people invested in them as a political statement, with investors avoiding stocks linked with tobacco. Today, this concept has grown beyond political activism. It is now a values-based part of financial analysis. Investors see it as a complementary strategy with fewer “activist” connotations.

Sustainable investing has come a long way in its over six decades of existence. Grand View Research reports that the global ESG investing market was valued at USD 25.10 trillion in 2023. Europe dominates with 85% of sustainable funds, totaling USD 2.5 trillion in 2023. In the same report, the market is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.8% from 2024 to 2030. The growth will stem from rising awareness and demand for value-aligned, sustainable investments.

ESG assets will keep rising as investors see their long-term potential. In 2023, sustainable funds returned 12.6%, outperforming traditional funds’ 8.6%. This outperformance spans equity and fixed-income assets. Therefore, sustainable investing is not just an ethical choice but a financially sound one.

Green Forex Strategies – A New Frontier

The forex market is the world’s largest financial market. Currency trade is based on economic, political, and social factors. Traders have traditionally focused on interest rates, inflation, and geopolitical tensions, which aid in predicting currency movements. However, this doesn’t seem so anymore, with the ESG wave reshaping forex trading.

Countries with strong ESG policies attract more foreign investment, boosting their currency value. Conversely, nations with poor sustainability may see weaker currencies. That said, here are case studies on how ESG impacts currency values;

The Euro and Green Energy policies: The EU implements green policies like the European Green Deal. This aims for carbon neutrality by 2050. These initiatives make the euro attractive to environmentally conscious investors. This way, the euro has stability.
Norway’s Sovereign Wealth Fund: Norway integrates ESG principles into its sovereign wealth fund management. They prioritize investments in sustainable industries. This strategy supports the Norwegian krone’s stability despite changes in oil prices.

Future Predictions and Emerging Trends

As the world advances towards a more sustainable future, ESG factors will play an essential role in financial investments such as forex markets.

Investors who incorporate ESG financial assets into their portfolios will likely have a competitive edge. Central banks may also set monetary policies based on ESG factors.

As green policies and ethical governance become the norm, here are key trends to anticipate:

Increase in ESG-oriented investments
Investments in renewable energy, particularly solar and wind
Redirecting financial resources to protect and manage natural ecosystems sustainably
Carbon trading and CO₂ footprint offsetting
Technological Advancements — Blockchain and AI enhancing ESG reporting transparency and efficiency

The post Why ESG Investing and Green Forex Are the Future of Finance appeared first on Green Prophet.