Both clean construction materials and carbon capture attract a lot of attention in climate. Materials startup Paebbl recently raised a $25M Series A round aimed at solving two critical problems at once: decarbonization of construction materials and permanent storage of carbon dioxide from carbon capture. Intrigued by this proposition, climate investors and impact experts Caroline Ebinger and Oona Poropudas decided to assess Paebbl using Lumi Partners’ Impact Framework.
We believe in the power of startups to significantly mitigate climate change. Startups, that is, with positive climate intentions; innovative, effective strategies that address the roots of climate crises; and the ability to scale commercially. Impact drives financial success, and vice versa, but assessing the impact potential of an early-stage startup can be tricky.
Thanks for reading Lumi Partners' Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
We chose to share our assessment of Paebbl’s impact potential both because we are intrigued by what the company is doing, and because we want to promote the idea that doing rigorous, meaningful, impact assessment is not only possible, but ought to be an important part of any climate investor’s investment analysis. Ebinger is a climate impact expert and has created an Impact Assessment Framework for Lumi Partners, where she is a senior associate. Poropudas has worked with Paebbl in the past as a climate investor and is also a climate impact expert: she recently co-authored an impact assessment article with Lumi founder John Gardner. Intrigued by the place that Paebbl has positioned itself at the cross section of two important climate sectors, the two of us are excited to share our insights!
So, how do we go about measuring this impact? We have found that many efforts to assess climate impact suffer from simply relying on a single metric, such as CO2e removed or prevented, or making a binary assessment on whether a company’s footprint is “Net Zero.” Philosophically, we believe a startup’s climate impact should be measured using multiple industry-relevant data points & analyses on the basis of potential impact: what impact can be achieved if everything “goes right,” from an impact perspective. Progress can then be tracked over time.
Lumi Impact Assessment Framework
Lumi’s impact methodology (developed by Ebinger, supported by Poropudas), is a synthesis that borrows from several impact philosophies and practical tools including the theory of change1, the Climate Brick2, and the Five Dimensions of Impact3. Our design objective was to create a framework that would be rigorous and robust, but which would also leverage prior scientific work in a standard way so as to become accessible to a climate investor — not only to a sector-specific researcher.
At a high level, we gather data in four categories before compiling our own Potential Impact Rating of Low to High. The categories are as follows:
Background — about company & industry
Pond Size — assumptions about industry and scope of environmental problem
Fish Size — assumptions about company and scale of impact the company may have; theory of change
Impact Intentionality — mission statement
So: Let’s dive into Paebbl!
Background
Northern Europe-based Paebbl is a materials technology startup pioneering a revolutionary approach to sustainable construction and carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS). Paebbl is working to solve the problems of (1) high emissions in construction material production, and (2) permanent storage of captured CO2. The company has developed a technology that accelerates the natural process of CO2 mineralization, transforming the greenhouse gas into a circular raw material. The current application of Paebbl’s mineralized CO2 is a carbon-storing supplementary cementitious material (SCM), to be used in concrete to drive down emissions resulting from the use of traditional cement. This innovative solution creates a physical market for CO2 (solving a carbon capture problem), permanently stores CO2 (up to 300 kg of CO2 per ton of material, helping abate climate change), and makes the manufacturing of construction products more material- and energy-efficient (creating a more sustainable building process). The company generates revenue by selling building materials and selling carbon credits. Paebbl is currently in the demonstration phase and is pushing the boundaries of standard process industry scaleup timelines due to the urgency of the work.
The construction industry is immensely complex with many players and levels, challenging economics, certification hurdles, and policy pressure. Decarbonizing construction is particularly challenging, as is shown by the relative lack of investment into the built environment as compared to other climate industries. Cement, alone, is a major climate change contributor. In fact, global cement manufacturing accounts for about 8% of total CO2 emissions. Lucky for the planet (and us!), the space is becoming more popular for innovation, investment, and environmental regulation. Paebbl is at the forefront of that charge.
Global cement manufacturing accounts for about 8% of total CO2 emissions.
Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (or, CCUS), is a set of technologies that capture CO2 from different gas mixtures, such as from industrial plants or the atmosphere, and either use or store it. Strategies to capture carbon (CC) include direct air capture (DAC), which uses technology to actively remove existing CO2 from the atmosphere, and point source emissions capture from industrial sources (e.g. factory chimneys). Usage (U) involves upcycling the captured CO2 by turning it into a valuable product. This usually means the CO2 is reemitted, but prevents net new CO2 from entering the atmosphere. Storage (S) involves permanently sequestering the CO2, usually underground, so that it cannot re-enter the atmosphere. Storage typically precludes usage. The pressure for climate technology companies to outcompete traditional, unsustainable competitors by being better, faster or cheaper in their respective marketplaces is critical; relying solely on regulation or subsidies is highly risky and considered a non-starter. Most carbon capture companies have struggled in this regard. While CCUS is critical to fight climate change, companies often face the challenge of how to use or store their captured CO2 economically. Paebbl creates a use case for this carbon, thereby solidifying the operational and business case for carbon capture technologies such as DAC.
Pond Size
What does Pond Size mean? You have heard the twin expressions “big fish in a small pond,” and “small fish in a big pond.” Lumi uses these metaphorical concepts — fish and pond sizes — to describe how big of a climate opportunity a company is addressing (pond size) and how big of a potential impact the company can have on that problem (fish size). Think of it like TAM, SAM, and SOM — but for impact. The difficulty of assessing scope of impact for a company varies greatly based on industry. As you will see below, in the case of Paebbl, it is clear that the company is swimming in a “very large pond.”
Cement: The “glue” in concrete, cement, accounts for approximately 8% of global emissions. Within this, clinker, a core component of cement that is a mix of limestone and minerals transformed by heat, is responsible for about 90% of emissions. About 60% of cement’s emissions are caused by so-called “process emissions,” referring to the chemical process of making clinker. This process actively creates and releases CO2 via limestone’s chemical reaction. Of the remaining 40%, 30% of emissions is connected to heat for the thermal processes and 10% is linked to everything else. Today, the production of one ton of conventional clinker releases about 0.83 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Figure 2. Traditional sources of cement emissions. Source: Joint Research Centre (EU), Poropudas & Ebinger
There are several strategies to combat these emissions, each with its own set of challenges and benefits. Strategies include carbon capture & storage from cement kilns, clinker substitution via SCM, novel binders that fully substitute clinker or Portland cement, carbon curing, more energy-efficient equipment & use of clean energy, and reduction of virgin cement use. CCUS from cement kilns is currently the least feasible strategy, while clinker substitutions and novel binders are becoming more popular, especially in startups, as is carbon curing. Making the production process more energy-efficient is feasible, but does not address the ample process emissions. Reduction of virgin cement use is also gaining in popularity, as construction prices are increasing, and sustainable building is becoming mandatory. While the market for cement is huge ($400B globally), it is not projected to rise heavily in the next five years and has been largely stagnant over the last ten due to pressures for sustainable alternatives, rising prices, and falling valuations. The cement and construction industries are ripe for change, and, despite inevitable challenges, the industries seem to know it is coming.
CCUS: CCUS is considered by many to be a critical component of maintaining a livable planet, but the industry faces several challenges as it tries to scale. High CapEx makes funding & building difficult, regulation has not supported CCUS as much as expected, and using or storing the captured CO2 has proven difficult and expensive. While utilization is more compelling economically, it is an underdeveloped market and, when the market does exist, is less of a win-win for the planet. Storage usually happens via transport and underground injection and somewhat guarantees the CO2 will stay out of the atmosphere, but challenges include siting and regulation, in addition to economic viability. The CCUS market CAGR is projected to be 13.3% from 2023 to 2032, growing from about $3B in 2023.
…and more! While Paebbl is currently deploying a process that creates a novel SCM from olivine and CO2, the company’s mineralization technology can work with other minerals and can create other products in industries beyond cement in the future. Cement is just the tip of the iceberg!
Based on market sizes, trends, and carbon emissions, we can see that Paebbl has found a massive opportunity that is ripe for disruption. The pond is large!
Fish Size
In our Pond Sizeanalysis, above, we determined that Paebbl’s relevant industries have significant impacts on the climate. Our next question is whether the company will be able to make significant impacts on them. Measuring a company’s potential scale of impact is different from measuring financial health or assessing a business plan, but it does require some similar principles. To do this, we determine:
the company’s theory of change,
whether a company has devised a solution that actually addresses the problems it set out to solve,
whether its technology is sound and its solution is feasible and defensible,
whether its solution has risks or adverse impacts, and
whether its solution is additional.
1. Theory of Change.Creating a theory of change (ToC) is important for evaluating a company’s solution, as it helps to define the company’s impact goals, to map which actions lead to the intended impacts, and to analyze whether the underlying assumptions hold true. In this early evaluation state, we create a ToC statement rather than working through the whole framework — an exercise best done together with the company. Because Paebbl’s business is multifaceted, we have developed two relevant theories of change:
By providing a carbon-negative SCM, producers will be able & willing to diminish the amount of clinker in cement, leading to reduced CO2 emissions and permanent sequestration of CO2.
By creating a usable product from captured CO2, DAC and other carbon capture companies will have financial motivation to continue operating and developing their technologies, leading to more carbon capture and a reduction in climate change.
We will examine the following critical assumptions and pre-conditions to these theories of change:
The alternative to using Paebbl’s material is less sustainable.
Storing CO2 in concrete is at least as beneficial as alternative CO2 storage options.
CO2 is, in fact, permanently stored within the material.
Concrete will continue to be an important component of the built environment.
CO2 will be a readily available input.
Paebbl’s use of CO2 will encourage DAC & other carbon capture companies to continue to exist.
Carbon capture is useful to the planet.
Carbon credits continue to be relevant.
Paebbl technology works, can be scaled, and can be provided where geographically advantageous.
Paebbl technology can be scaled within a timeframe that is able to take advantage of a changing concrete industry to become standard before an alternative does.
Paebbl technology can be scaled within a timeframe that is relevant for the climate.
2. Solving the Right Problem? Guided by the theory of change, the next step is to determine whether a company is solving the right problems. One of the two major problems Paebbl has set out to solve is high emissions in construction materials (cement) production. We must then examine whether Paebbl’s solution is, in fact, contributing to a decrease in emissions in concrete production. As we know, producing clinker is the primary source of emissions in cement. Paebbl’s product will replace a portion of clinker with its SCM that does not require a high temperature to produce. SCMs have become an increasingly popular method to decrease the carbon footprint of cement. However, traditional SCMs such as fly ash (from coal-fired power plants) and blast furnace slag (from coal-based steelmaking) are being phased out, leaving space for novel and more environmentally friendly SCMs. Substituting clinker with Paebbl’s SCM has a direct impact on CO2 emissions from heating and process in cement production. Their process of accelerated mineralization has the potential to reduce the carbon footprint of concrete by up to 70% and to sequester 0.33 tons of carbon per ton of cement. (Note that the depth of the impact depends on the level of cement substitution yet to be certified, and the numbers are based on Paebbl’s testing, not yet third party verified). As discussed, there are alternative forms of “clean cement,” but some of these can be done in tandem with Paebbl’s process and others are often less effective in reducing emissions or more difficult to implement. When used, Paebbl clearly has the ability to greatly reduce emissions from cement and concrete.
The next problem Paebbl is addressing is a lack of permanent storage for captured CO2. Does Paebbl’s solution contribute meaningfully to this problem? Could Paebbl become a significant player in the CCUS market? Despite current challenges, the CCUS market is still projected to expand significantly. Paebbl's technology itself indirectly contributes to the growth of the CCUS market by creating demand for captured CO2, fostering a positive feedback loop. Paebbl’s use of CO2 eliminates tradeoffs between utilization and storage of CO2, providing a market that permanently stores CO2. Furthermore, Paebbl’s solution expands the geographical area of carbon capture as it can be deployed even in land-locked areas without access to underground storage. Carbon credits currently provide one of several revenue streams for Paebbl.
Paebbl has a grasp on the intricacies of each problem it is setting out to solve and should be able to contribute meaningfully to both. Additionally, a solution that bridges two industries may end up being the necessary accelerant to deployment.
3. Sound Technology & Feasible, Defensible Solution?Sound theory must be supported by sound technology. Paebbl was founded on its technology. In fact, Paebbl’s co-founder Pol Knops spent nearly two decades researching carbon mineralization and developing the company’s first prototype. Since then, Paebbl has also put great emphasis on fine-tuning its operations. According to the company’s website, “Paebbl's breakthrough is the combination of optimal process conditions and equipment, choice of mineral feed, application of product in concrete and a business model utilising the value found in carbon dioxide sequestration in today's market conditions.” Why isn’t the technology itself a breakthrough? Because CO2 mineralization is already done naturally by the planet; Paebbl is simply speeding it up. This, along with the fact that the company uses largely off-the-shelf components, ensures low technological risk.
Referring back to the Climate Brick framework, Paebbl is best categorized as a “New Technology” climate company. According to the framework’s research, three “critical unlocks” lead to success in New Technology: (1) establishment of IP moats, (2) a clear roadmap to cost competitiveness, and (3) proven high technology readiness and demand. Paebbl appears to be addressing all three head on, (1) with heavy investment into a patented material science process, (2) by having a clear roadmap for cost competitiveness, including their process development and feedstock choices as mentioned above, and (3) with sound technology, a demonstration plant, and partnerships with cement & concrete manufacturers and carbon capture companies.
Whether Paebbl’s solution is feasible depends largely on their ability to convince cement manufacturers and buyers to use their product. The construction industry is a conventional and highly regulated market. While the regulations serve an important purpose of ensuring that buildings and infrastructure are safe and built to last, they also can serve as a high barrier to entry for novel innovations. Cement manufacturers also wield a lot of power in this market, and its institutions, and are reluctant to welcome distributors to the market that might undermine their own market power. Additionally, cement and concrete manufacturers operate expensive production lines with long life cycles so that innovative products need to fit into their existing operations to be attractive. Whether Paebbl’s product will be used depends largely on the team’s ability to find customers with an appetite for the solution and to develop a product with an attractive price that requires minimum production line changes from its building material customers. To combat these issues, Paebbl is actively working with multiple relevant industry players for testing and co-developing their product. Furthermore, Paebbl has managed to secure funding from the venture arms of large construction companies such as Holcim and Goldbeck, demonstrating some level of early industry interest in the Paebbl solution. Pace of commercial adoption will definitely be modulated by continued regulatory tailwinds. This is, of course, a risk or dependency as well, but our outlook on regulatory support for both the emission reductions and carbon storage aspects of Paebbl’s business is positive over the longer term.
“We are working closely with our early customers to test and develop our product to ensure it meets the real needs of the construction industry. This is an important principle to maximize the speed of adoption for our carbon-storing material.”
—Andreas Saari, Co-CEO, Paebbl
Feasibility also depends on Paebbl’s ability to scale quickly enough to be relevant for the Net Zero 2050. Net Zero 2050 refers to the global ambition to reach a balance between CO2 emissions and removals by the year 2050 to stay below the 2°C global warming committed to in the Paris Agreement. To keep on track with this intense timeline, Paebbl has been focused on growth-hacking, and has been able to scale “from grams to hundreds of kilograms” of material production in 24 months and is building a demonstration plant that will take in 300 tons of CO2 annually. According to co-CEO Marta Sjögren, the team is “anticipating to be on hundreds of thousands of tons in the near foreseeable future.”
For context in terms of this scale of CO2, DAC startup Noya considers removing “fewer than 100 tons” to be their small, individual offering for carbon removal, and DAC startup Heirloom is aiming to capture 320,000 tons of CO2 annually between two plants in the coming years. (As DAC companies, Noya & Heirloom could be partners with Paebbl.) In 2023, we on Earth emitted 37 billion tons of CO2 globally. While Paebbl is pushing the boundaries of a scaling timeline, it will clearly need to be combined with other solutions to carbon sequestration to reach necessary capacity. For her part, Sjögren recognizes that in order to tackle climate change many solutions are needed: “There is so much market [for CO2] out there that I think we need all shots on goal.”
4. Risks or Adverse Impacts?Impact risks are different from those used to assess overall company risks. Here, we determine the factors that could prevent Paebbl from having the impact it seeks on cement production and CO2 sequestration, as well as their likelihoods. Some of these risks, along with our analysis of them, include:
CCUS & DAC cease to exist, therefore the CO2 supply fails. Unlikely in the long-run. Even if DAC does not continue, Paebbl can continue to use CO2 from industrial emitters.
Voluntary carbon markets will lose favor and not be replaced by regulation. Again, an unlikely problem in the long-run, even if possible in the medium-term. Alternative business models also mitigate risk.
Regulatory risk that construction industry will push out Paebbl. Addressed above.
Paebbl’s carbon credits will be too expensive. This is a concern in the short- and medium-terms. Paebbl’s advantage is that its carbon credits are definite and easily quantifiable and verifiable in a market where carbon credits are often mistrusted, allowing some price premium.
Cost of product too high to be adopted. Risk that the Climate Brick acknowledges, as well. Carbon credits to help with this in the short-term. Part of intense scaling effort is to get to cost parity.
By creating more sustainable building materials, a substitution effect takes place and society ends up building more instead of reducing emissions and maintaining natural areas. This is a true hazard but since building and infrastructure uptake are unavoidable given the increasing population, it is better that we achieve more wellbeing with the same footprint.
This “easy way” for industrial emitters to “reconcile” their emissions by CCUS reduces their incentives to actually cut emissions. Again, this is a likely risk but tightening regulation pushes industrial emitters to reach Net Zero by 2050, and both solutions are needed to get there.
Technology is not sound. Addressed above.
CO2 storage and clean cement are not baked into the business model. There is interlock as CO2 is a key material. Cement is the first product of many Paebbl is hoping to create, but each should have similar climate implications. Additionally, Paebbl leadership is committed to combating climate change.
Labor is negatively impacted in an unforeseen way. Cement manufacturing is common and Paebbl’s process is similar enough to existing strategies that likelihood is low of negative labor impacts. Rather, positive impacts (lower local air pollution & dust) on workers are likely.
Demand for cement decreases. This is possible but not likely as much of the world continues to grow. The market is so large that it is not a concern that it is not growing rapidly, and the clean cement market will likely grow within cement as a whole. Traditional SCMs are becoming more scarce; Paebbl has an opportunity to provide a clean source.
Paebbl will prevent other, better solutions to carbon storage and clean cement. Paebbl is the biggest win-win solution to storage & cement that we have seen. There will also be a need for many solutions to both problems; even if there are others that are “better,” Paebbl will continue to be valuable as it replaces dirty cement rather than alternative clean cements. (Replacing alternative clean cements is a small, but existent, risk. More likely the market for clean cement will become large enough that many players can “win,” from SCM companies, like Paebbl, to direct cement replacement companies, like Sublime.)
5. Additional?Even if not all of the components of Paebbl stand, it could still be considered a climate success. The primary alternatives to Paebbl’s technology are the continued use of "dirty" cement and a missing market for captured CO2. These alternatives perpetuate the problem of high emissions from cement and limit the potential for carbon removal. Paebbl’s technology offers a clear and compelling improvement over these status quo options.
Paebbl's approach is more collaborative than competitive. There are additional startups working on carbon mineralization and clean cement, but as co-CEO Sjögren stated, she wishes there were “50 more companies” working on similar problems. This highlights the scale of the problem and the need for multiple solutions. Again, solutions to decrease cement emissions fall into several categories: CCUS directly from cement kilns (challenging to make economically worth it, but possible to collaborate with Paebbl), clinker substitution using SCMs (like Paebbl), novel binders that fully substitute clinker or Portland cement (effective, though can be challenging to implement), carbon curing & other direct carbon strategies (can often be used with other techniques, as in the case of Paebbl), energy efficiency (should be used with other techniques for increased impact), and reduction of virgin cement use (world will, regardless, use cement). Instead of viewing other companies in the space exclusively as rivals, Paebbl sees them as potential partners in addressing a global challenge — both figuratively and literally, if their technologies are complementary. Paebbl’s collaborative spirit is also a positive indicator of the company’s commitment to climate impact. Below, see some of the startups working on sustainable cement.
Select clean cement players and how they compare to OPC & each other.
Directly measuring impact can be useful in determining additionality, though, as discussed, it is notoriously difficult to do. Paebbl itself is “proactively align[ing its] methodologies with leading Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) providers and emerging regulatory frameworks, such as the EU's Carbon Storage in Products.” Because one of Paebbl’s primary impact areas is CO2 storage, it is simple to attribute tons of CO2 reduced directly to Paebbl. Every additional ton of CO2 stored can be attributed to Paebbl. (As you can see above, many of the clean cement players measure their impact primarily in terms of CO2 emissions, which is a critical and comparable indicator, but insufficient alone.) The difference in energy and fuel use in cement production using Paebbl is also easy to determine. Assuming Paebbl takes business from dirty cement rather than clean cement players or legacy SCM makers, Paebbl should only have a positive impact on climate. Marketing and continuing to collaborate with others in the space will help build a robust clean cement market that will replace dirty cement rather than cause competition within the small clean portion of the cement industry.
Measurability of its additionality to the DAC/CCUS market is more challenging, but can be estimated by analyzing the alternatives to Paebbl. Paebbl’s approach is impactful because it offers both carbon storage and utilization. Furthermore, because the existing utilization & storage markets are so small, Paebbl should have a tangible impact if it can scale quickly enough. When utilization & storage options become more plentiful, it is possible that Paebbl would no longer be the most efficient option. As long as it does not take business from more efficient options, Paebbl will still have a fully positive impact. Given the projected growth of carbon capture, this should not be a problem in the near future. Additionally, carbon storage will not be a winner-take-all market. Based on factors including location and cost, different methods of storage will be optimal for different carbon capture projects, and here Paebbl has an advantage by offering an economically viable solution that does not require underground access. We believe CCUS will become a large enough market to support multiple storage solutions.
Select carbon storage & utilization strategies.
Paebbl is an early mover in the markets for cement and carbon, making its contributions critical to these industries now, regardless of what happens in the future. Paebbl will always, at minimum, be a critical stepping stone in the clean cement and carbon sequestration industries — and we think, given strong IP and proof of concept, it will be much more than this.
Overall Fish Size.Paebbl's impact is multifaceted: it directly addresses the problem of CO2 storage by permanently mineralizing captured carbon, indirectly contributes to CO2 storage by creating a market for CO2 and thus incentivizing further development and deployment of DAC and other carbon capture technologies, and directly reduces the carbon intensity of cement production by offering a less carbon-intensive alternative to traditional processes.
The remaining, crucial question is whether Paebbl can scale fast enough to make a meaningful difference in the face of the urgent climate crisis and the ongoing construction boom. While this remains a key challenge, the Paebbl team is acutely aware of the need for rapid scaling and is actively pushing the boundaries of traditional scaling timelines. We like their odds, but only time will tell…
Paebbl has a tangible impact on CO2 stored and an immeasurable impact on moving the industry forward. It is a medium-sized fish!
Based on our analysis, Paebbl is a medium-sized fish in a large pond.
Impact Intentionality
Our final step is to assess impact intentionality. We do so because we believe that intention begets action. While Paebbl is clearly focused on bringing climate-forward solutions to market, we found it difficult to parse out from the company’s public facing materials a specific, concrete mission statement. However, in interviews, Sjögren has stated that Paebbl’s vision is to, “build a portfolio of carbon-storing products that play[s] a key role as a negative emissions technology to decarbonize other industries.”Sjögren makes it clear that cement (and using olivine in the process) is an initial product, and that the team’s vision for Paebbl is to be a foundational de-carbonizer of multiple heavy industries even beyond cement; i.e. that climate impact is a key definitional component of the company’s identity, and an important success factor. Sjögren also states that her personal parameters for founding a company in the climate space were that: (1) it should never allow itself to be perceived as greenwashing, (2) it must be based on a scalable technology; and (3) it must offer a path to profitability if it is going to make a long-term difference in the market. She understands that economic success and climate impact are mutually reinforcing objectives. Likewise, co-CEO Andreas Saari holds a long-time passion for climate, and Paebbl is the second climate tech company he has co-founded.
Given what we know from public statements, and moreover from relationships with the founders, it is clear that Paebbl is focused on making a positive climate impact and plans to do so through CO2 storage & utilization and building materials. This reassures us that Paebbl will not switch its business model to something that does not serve the planet.
Figure 3. Spider chart of Paebbl’s impact potential in relevant categories. Source: Poropudas & Ebinger
Impact Conclusion: Paebbl
Based on our analysis, we have concluded that Paebbl is a medium-sized fish in such a large pond that it could even be called a lake. This fish/lake combination represents a Highpotential climate impact rating. Some of the key factors contributing to this include:
tackling significant climate challenges, including emissions from cement manufacturing and CO2 storage;
direct CO2 impact and new technology that will play a key role in industry transformation;
sound & research-backed theories of change and technology, though somewhat dependent upon regulation; and
planet-first strategy driving quick but sustainable growth.
With big emissions to tackle, a big market, and big promise, we can’t wait to see how Paebbl transforms the built environment. Paebbl’s innovative solution is a win-win, making cement cleaner while storing carbon.
Paebbl has high potential for significant positive climate impact.
Figure 4. Impact potential scale. As visible in the graph, Paebbl has a high impact potential due to its large pond and medium fish sizes. Source: Ebinger & Poropudas
Impact Measurement: A Redux
As you can see, this impact measurement framework is built on philosophies of holistic, systems thinking and diving deep to understand climate industries & strategies. It is built on research, data, and existing impact concepts, and does not rely on one single metric — or even a random collection of metrics. Rather, it encompasses feasibility, intention, environmental impacts, and carbon reduction. While this framework is by no means the only “right” way to measure impact, it provides a systematic, repeatable method with which to evaluate the impact profile of a given climate tech startup.
~~
We always love to talk about impact, learn more about others’ impact measurement strategies, and refine our own techniques. Please reach out if you are interested in discussing further, and consider digging into Paebbl on your own!
Caroline Ebinger is passionate about creating a livable planet for people and wildlife and believes that startups are a critical part of realizing this future. Having studied business and conservation at Yale University, Caroline is now a senior associate leading impact analysis at Lumi Partners. Lumi’s mission is to drive systemic change by investing directly & indirectly into the companies that will be the most impactful in climate. As of the publication date, Lumi has not invested in Paebbl, though knows the company through its network.
Oona Poropudas works with funds, founders, limited partners, and NGOs in the quest of shifting more capital into impact challenges. She has previously worked as an impact investor, ESG & Impact Manager and has led the technology conference Slush as the President. Oona knows Paebbl directly through previous investing work and has previously worked with Lumi on Impact Assessment: A Practical Approach for Investors.
Impact: There are seemingly endless frameworks for assessing the climate impact of technology companies, yet no one framework is sufficient. We suggest reading our strategies, as outlined in Poropudas’ Substack, as a helpful point of departure. (In this analysis, we have included each of the ten steps outlined in the Framework.) Additional frameworks that we incorporate into our impact assessments include the Climate Brick (assessing whether scaling is possible and on track), the Five Dimensions of Impact (a standardized way to understand impact), theory of change (assessing assumptions and logic), and Valo’s Impact Measurement Framework (helping determine appropriate expectations).
A theory of change is a framework that shows how a specific intervention should lead to a desired outcome, outlining the causal chain of events. Learn more here.
The Climate Brick establishes a framework for scaling climate tech. It has published the “missing manual” for scaling climate tech across 7 'bricks' (company archetypes). Learn more here.
