3 takeaways about climate tech right now

On Monday, we published our 2025 edition of Climate Tech Companies to Watch. This marks the third time we’ve put the list together, and it’s become one of my favorite projects to work on every year. 

In the journalism world, it’s easy to get caught up in the latest news, whether it’s a fundraising round, research paper, or startup failure. Curating this list gives our team a chance to take a step back and consider the broader picture. What industries are making progress or lagging behind? Which countries or regions are seeing quick changes? Who’s likely to succeed? 

This year is an especially interesting moment in the climate tech world, something we grappled with while choosing companies. Here are three of my takeaways from the process of building this list. 

1. It’s hard to overstate China’s role in energy technology right now. 

To put it bluntly, China’s progress on cleantech is wild. The country is dominating in installing wind and solar power and building EVs, and it’s also pumping government money into emerging technologies like fusion energy. 

We knew we wanted this list to reflect China’s emergence as a global energy superpower, and we ended up including two Chinese firms in key industries: renewables and batteries.

In 2024, China accounted for the top four wind turbine makers worldwide. Envision was in the second spot, with 19.3 gigawatts of new capacity added last year. But the company isn’t limited to wind; it’s working to help power heavy industries like steel and chemicals with technology like green hydrogen. 

Batteries are also a hot industry in China, and we’re seeing progress in tech beyond the lithium-ion cells that currently dominate EVs and energy storage on the grid. We represent that industry with HiNa Battery Technology, a leading startup building sodium-ion batteries, which could be cheaper than today’s options. The company’s batteries are already being used in electric mopeds and grid installations. 

2. Energy demand from data centers and AI is on everyone’s mind, especially in the US. 

Another trend we noticed this year was a fixation on the growing energy demand of data centers, including massive planned dedicated facilities that power AI models. (Here’s another nudge to check out our Power Hungry series on AI and energy, in case you haven’t explored it already.) 

Even if their technology has nothing to do with data centers, companies are trying to show how they can be valuable in this age of rising energy demand. Some are signing lucrative deals with tech giants that could provide the money needed to help bring their product to market. 

Kairos Power hopes to be one such energy generator, building next-generation nuclear reactors. Last year, the company signed an agreement with Google that will see the company buy up to 500 megawatts of electricity from Kairos’s first reactors through 2035. 

In a more direct play, Redwood Materials is stringing together used EV batteries to build microgrids that could power—you guessed it—data centers. The company’s first installation fired up this year, and while it’s small, it’s an interesting example of a new use for old technology. 

3. Materials continue to be an area that’s ripe for innovation. 

In a new essay that accompanies the list, Bill Gates lays out the key role of innovation in making progress on climate technology. One thing that jumped out at me while I was reading that piece was a number: 30% of global greenhouse-gas emissions come from manufacturing, including cement and steel production. 

I’ve obviously covered materials and heavy industry for years. But it still strikes me just how much innovation we still need in the most important materials we use to scaffold our world. 

Several companies on this year’s list focus on materials: We’ve once again represented cement, a material that accounts for 7% of global greenhouse-gas emissions. Cemvision is working to use alternative fuel sources and starting materials to clean up the dirty industry. 

And Cyclic Materials is trying to reclaim and recycle rare earth magnets, a crucial technology that underpins everything from speakers to EVs and wind turbines. Today, only about 0.2% of rare earths from recycled devices are recycled, but the company is building multiple facilities in North America in hopes of changing that. 

Our list of 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch highlights businesses we think have a shot at helping the world address and adapt to climate change with the help of everything from established energy technologies to novel materials. It’s a representation of this moment, and I hope you enjoy taking a spin through it.

This company is planning a lithium empire from the shores of the Great Salt Lake

BOX ELDER COUNTY, Utah – On a bright afternoon in August, the shore on the North Arm of the Great Salt Lake looks like something out of a science fiction film set in a scorching alien world. The desert sun is blinding as it reflects off the white salt that gathers and crunches underfoot like snow at the water’s edge. In a part of the lake too shallow for boats, bacteria have turned the water a Pepto-Bismol pink. The landscape all around is ringed with jagged red mountains and brown brush. The only obvious sign of people is the salt-encrusted hose running from the water’s edge to a makeshift encampment of shipping containers and trucks a few hundred feet away. 

This otherworldly scene is the test site for a company called Lilac Solutions, which is developing a technology it says will shake up the United States’ efforts to pry control over the global supply of lithium, the so-called “white gold” needed for electric vehicles and batteries, away from China. Before tearing down its demonstration facility to make way for its first commercial plant, due online next year, the company invited me to be the first journalist to tour its outpost in this remote area, a roughly two-hour drive from Salt Lake City.

The startup is in a race to commercialize a new way to extract lithium from rocks, called direct lithium extraction (DLE). This approach is designed to reduce the environmental damage caused by the two most common traditional methods of mining lithium: hard-rock mining and brining. 

Australia, the world’s top producer of lithium, uses the first approach, scraping rocks laden with lithium out of the earth so they can be chemically processed into industrial-grade versions of the metal. Chile, the second-largest lithium source, uses the second: It floods areas of its sun-soaked Atacama Desert with water. This results in ponds rich in dissolved lithium, which are then allowed to dry off, leaving behind lithium salts that can be harvested and processed elsewhere. 

a black hose crusted and partly buried with white and pink minerals winds into a pool of water
An intake hose, used to pump water to Lilac Solutions’ demonstration site, snakes into the pink-hued Great Salt Lake.
ALEXANDER KAUFMAN

The range of methods known as DLE use lithium brine too, but instead of water-intensive evaporation, they all involve advanced chemical or physical filtering processes that selectively separate out lithium ions. While DLE has yet to take off, its reduced need for water and land has made it a prime focus for companies and governments looking to ramp up production to meet the growing demand for lithium as electric vehicles take off and even bigger batteries are increasingly used to back up power grids. China, which processes more than two-thirds of the world’s mined lithium, is developing its own DLE to increase domestic production of the raw material. New approaches are still being researched, but nearly a dozen companies are actively looking to commercialize DLE technology now, and some industrial giants already offer basic off-the-shelf hardware. 

In August, Lilac completed its most advanced test yet of its technology, which the company says doesn’t just require far less water than traditional lithium extraction—it uses a fraction of what other DLE approaches demand. 

The company uses proprietary beads to draw lithium ions from water and says its process can extract lithium using a tenth as much water as the alumina sorbent technology that dominates the DLE industry. Lilac also highlights its all-American supply chain. Technology originally developed by Koch Industries, for example, uses some Chinese-made components. Lilac’s beads are manufactured at the company’s plant in Nevada. 

Lilac says the beads are particularly well suited to extracting lithium where concentrations are low. That doesn’t mean they could be deployed just anywhere—there won’t be lithium extraction on the Hudson River anytime soon. But Lilac’s tech could offer significant advantages over what’s currently on the market. And forgoing plans to become a major producer itself could enable the company to seize a decent slice of global production by appealing to lithium miners companies looking for the best equipment, says Milo McBride, a researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who authored a recent report on DLE. 

If everything pans out, the pilot plant Lilac builds next to prove its technology at commercial scale could significantly increase domestic supply at a moment when the nation’s largest proposed lithium project, the controversial hard-rock Thacker Pass mine in Nevada, has faced fresh uncertainty. At the beginning of October, the Trump administration renegotiated a federal loan worth more than $2 billion to secure a 5% ownership stake for the US government. 

walking path between several tall blue tanks connected by hose
The blue tank on the left filters the brine from the Great Salt Lake to remove large particles before pumping the lithium-rich water into the ion-exchange systems located in the shipping containers.
ALEXANDER KAUFMAN

Despite bipartisan government support, the prospect of opening a deep gash in an unspoiled stretch of Nevada landscape has drawn fierce opposition from conservationists and lawsuits from ranchers and Native American tribes who say the Thacker Pass project would destroy the underground freshwater reservoirs on which they depend. Water shortages in the parched West have also made it difficult to plan on using additional evaporation ponds, the other traditional way of extracting lithium. 

Lilac is not the only company in the US pushing for DLE. In California’s Salton Sea, developers such as EnergySource Minerals are looking to build a geothermal power plant to power a DLE facility pulling lithium from the inland desert lake. And energy giants such as Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and Occidental Petroleum are racing to develop an area in southwestern Arkansas called the Smackover region, where researchers with the US Geological Survey have found as much as 19 million metric tons of untapped lithium in salty underground water. In between, both geographically and strategically, is Lilac: It’s looking to develop new technology like the California companies but sell its hardware to the energy giants in Arkansas. 

The Great Salt Lake isn’t an obvious place to develop a lithium mine. The Salton Sea boasts lithium concentrations of just under 200 parts per million. Argentina, where Lilac has another test facility, has resources of above 700 parts per million. 

Here on the Great Salt Lake? “It’s 70 parts per million,” Raef Sully, Lilac’s Australia-born chief executive, tells me. “So if you had a football stadium with 45,000 seats, this would be three people.”

For Lilac, this is actually a feature of the location. “It’s a very, very good demonstration of the capability of our technology,” Sully says. Showing that Lilac’s hardware can extract lithium at high purity levels from a brine with low concentration, he says, proves its versatility. That wasn’t the reason Lilac selected the site, though. “Utah is a mining friendly state,” says Elizabeth Pond, the vice president of communications. And though the lake water has low concentrations of lithium, extracting the brine simply calls for running a hose into the water, whereas other locations would require digging a well at great cost. 

When I accompanied Sully to the test site during my tour, our route following unpaved county roads lined with fields of wild sunflowers. The facility itself is little more than an assortment of converted shipping containers and two mobile trailers, one to serve as the main office and the other as a field laboratory to test samples. It’s off the grid, relying on diesel generators that the company says will be replaced with propane units once this location is converted to a permanent facility but could eventually be swapped for geothermal technology tapping into a hot rock resource located nearby. (Solar panels, Sully clarifies, couldn’t supply the 24-7 power supply the facility will need.) But it depends on its connection to the Great Salt Lake via that lengthy hose. 

hand holding a square of wire mesh with a clump of crystals in the center
Hardened salt and impurities are encrusted on metal mesh that keeps larger materials out of Lilac’s water intake system.
ALEXANDER KAUFMAN

Pumped uphill, the lake water passes through a series of filters to remove solids until it ends up in a vessel filled with the company’s specially designed ceramic beads, made from a patented material that attracts lithium ions from the water. Once saturated, the beads are put through an acid wash to remove the lithium. The remaining brine is then repeatedly tested and, once deemed safe to release back into the lake, pumped back down to the shore through an outgoing tube in the hose. The lithium solution, meanwhile, is stockpiled in tanks on site before shipping off to a processing plant to be turned into battery-grade lithium carbonate, which is a white powder. 

“As a technology provider in the long term, if we’re going to have decades of lithium demand, they want to position their technology as something that can tap a bunch of markets,” McBride says. “To have a technology that can potentially economically recover different types of resources in different types of environments is an enticing proposition.” 

This testing ground won’t stay this way for long. During my visit, Lilac’s crew was starting to pack up the location after completing its demonstration testing. The results the company shared exclusively with me suggest a smashing success, particularly for such low-grade brine with numerous impurities: Lilac’s equipment recovered 87% of the available lithium, on average, with a purity rate of 99.97%.

The next step will be to clear the area to make way for construction of Lilac’s first permanent commercial facility at the same site. To meet the stipulations of Utah state permits for the new plant, the company had to cease all operations at the demonstration project. If everything goes according to plan, Lilac’s first US facility will begin commercial production in the second half of 2027. The company has lined up about two-thirds of its funding for the project. That could make the plant the first new commercial source of lithium in the US to come online in years, and the first DLE facility ever. 

Once it’s fully online, the project should produce 5,000 tons per year—doubling annual US production of lithium. But a full-scale plant using Lilac’s technology would produce between three and five times that amount. 

There are some potential snags. Utah regulators this year started cracking down on mineral companies pumping water from the Great Salt Lake, which is shrinking amid worsening droughts. (Lilac says it’s largely immune to the restrictions since it returns the water to the lake.) While the relatively low concentrations of lithium in the water make for a good test case, full-scale commercial production would likely prove far more economical in a place with more of the metal. 

sunflowers growing next to a dirt road
Wild sunflowers line the unpaved county roads that cut through ranching land en route to Lilac Solutions’ remote demonstration site.
ALEXANDER KAUFMAN

“The Great Salt Lake is probably the worst possible place to be doing this, because there are real challenges around pulling water from the lake,” says Ashley Zumwalt-Forbes, a mining engineer who previously served as the deputy director of battery minerals at the Department of Energy. “But if it’s just being used as a trial for the technology, that makes sense.” 

What makes Lilac stand out among its peers is that it has no plans to design and manufacture its own DLE equipment and produce actual lithium. Lilac wants instead to sell its technology to others. The pilot plant is just intended to test and debut its hardware. Sully tells me it’s being built under a separate limited-liability corporation to make a potential sale easier if it’s successful. 

It’s an unusual play in the lithium industry. Once most companies see success with their technology, “they go crazy and think they can vertically integrate and at the same time be a miner and an energy producer,” Kwasi Ampofo, the head of minerals and metals at the energy consultancy BloombergNEF, tells me. 

“Lilac is trying to be a technology vendor,” he says. “I wonder why a lot more people aren’t choosing that route.” 

If things work out the right way, Sully says, Lilac could become the vendor of choice to projects like the oil-backed sites in the Smackover and beyond. 

“We think our technology is the next generation,” he says. “And if we end up working with an Exxon or a Chevron or a Rio Tinto, we want to be the DLE technology provider in their lithium project.”

The Trump administration may cut funding for two major direct-air capture plants

The US Department of Energy appears poised to terminate funding for a pair of large carbon-sucking factories that were originally set to receive more than $1 billion in government grants, according to a department-issued list of projects obtained by MIT Technology Review and circulating among federal agencies.

One of the projects is the South Texas Direct Air Capture Hub, a facility that Occidental Petroleum’s 1PointFive subsidiary planned to develop in Kleberg County, Texas. The other is Project Cypress in Louisiana, a collaboration between Battelle, Climeworks, and Heirloom.

The list features a “latest status” column, which includes the word “terminate” next to the roughly $50 million award amounts for each project. Those line up with the initial tranche of Department of Energy (DOE) funding for each development. According to the original announcement in 2023, the projects could have received $500 million or more in total grants as they proceeded.

It’s not clear if the termination of the initial grants would mean the full funding would also be canceled.

“It could mean nothing,” says Erin Burns, executive director of Carbon180, a nonprofit that advocates for the removal and reuse of carbon dioxide. “It could mean there’s a renegotiation of the awards. Or it could mean they’re entirely cut. But the uncertainty certainly doesn’t help projects.”

A DOE spokesman stressed that no final decision has been made.

“It is incorrect to suggest those two projects have been terminated and we are unable to verify any lists provided by anonymous sources,” Ben Dietderich, the department’s press secretary, said in an email, adding: “The Department continues to conduct an individualized and thorough review of financial awards made by the previous administration.”

Last week, the DOE announced it would terminate about $7.5 billion dollars in grants for more than 200 projects, stating that they “did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs, were not economically viable, and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars.”

Battelle and 1PointFive didn’t respond to inquiries from MIT Technology Review.

“Market rumors have surfaced, and Climeworks is prepared for all scenarios,” Christoph Gebald, one of the company’s co-CEOs, said in a statement. He added later: “The need for DAC is growing as the world falls short of its climate goals and we’re working to achieve the gigaton capacity that will be needed.”

“We aren’t aware of a decision from DOE and continue to productively engage with the administration in a project review,” Heirloom said in a statement.

The rising dangers of climate change have driven the development of the direct-air capture industry in recent years.

Climate models have found that the world may need to suck down billions of tons of carbon dioxide per year by around midcentury, on top of dramatic emissions cuts, to prevent the planet from warming past 2˚ C.

Carbon-sucking direct-air factories are considered one of the most reliable ways of drawing the greenhouse gas out of the atmosphere, but they also remain one of the most expensive and energy-intensive methods.

Under former President Joe Biden, the US began providing increasingly generous grants, subsidies and other forms of support to help scale up the nascent sector.

The grants now in question were allocated under the DOE’s Regional Direct Air Capture Hubs program, which was funded through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The goal was to set up several major carbon removal clusters across the US, each capable of sucking down and sequestering at least a million tons of the greenhouse gas per year.

“Today’s news that a decision to cancel lawfully designated funding for the [direct-air-capture projects] could come soon risks handing a win to competitors abroad and undermines the commitments made to businesses, communities, and leaders in Louisiana and South Texas,” said Giana Amador of the Carbon Removal Alliance and Ben Rubin of the Carbon Business Council in a joint statement.

This story was updated to include additional quotes, a response from the Department of Energy and added context on the development of the carbon removal sector.

Bill Gates: Our best weapon against climate change is ingenuity

It’s a foregone conclusion that the world will not meet the goals for limiting emissions and global warming laid out in the 2015 Paris Agreement. Many people want to blame politicians and corporations for this failure, but there’s an even more fundamental reason: We don’t have all the technological tools we need to do it, and many of the ones we do have are too expensive.

For all the progress the world has made on renewable energy sources, electric vehicles, and electricity storage, we need a lot more innovation on every front—from discovery to deployment—before we can hope to reach our ultimate goal of net-zero emissions. 

But I don’t think this is a reason to be pessimistic. I see it as cause for optimism, because humans are very good at inventing things. In fact, we’ve already created many tools that are reducing emissions. In just the past 10 years, energy breakthroughs have lowered the global forecast for emissions in 2040 by 40%. In other words, because of the human capacity to innovate, we are on course to reduce emissions substantially by 2040 even if nothing else changes.

And I am confident that more positive changes are coming. I’ve been learning about global warming and investing in ideas to stop it for the past 20 years. I’ve connected with unbiased scientists and innovators who are committed to preventing a climate disaster. Ten years ago, some of them joined me in creating Breakthrough Energy, an investment group whose sole purpose is to accelerate clean energy innovation. We’ve supported more than 150 companies so far, many of which have blossomed into major businesses such as Fervo Energy and Redwood Materials, two of this year’s Companies to Watch. [Editor’s note: Mr. Gates did not participate in the selection process of this year’s companies and was not aware that two Breakthrough investments had been selected when he agreed to write this essay.]

Yet climate technologies offer more than just a public good. They will remake virtually every aspect of the world’s economy in the coming years, transforming energy markets, manufacturing, transportation, and many types of industry and food production. Some of these efforts will require long-term commitments, but it’s important that we act now. And what’s more, it’s already clear where the opportunities lie. 

In the past decade, an ecosystem of thousands of innovators, investors, and industry leaders has emerged to work on every aspect of the problem. This year’s list of 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch shows just a few of the many examples.

Although much of this innovation ecosystem has matured on American shores, it has become a global movement that won’t be stopped by new obstacles in the US. It’s unfortunate that governments in the US and other countries have decided to cut funding for climate innovations and reverse some of the policies that help breakthrough ideas get to scale. In this environment, we need to be more rigorous than ever about spending our time, money, and ingenuity on efforts that will have the biggest impact.

How do we figure out which ones those are? First, by understanding which activities are responsible for the most emissions. I group them into five categories: electricity generation, manufacturing, transportation, agriculture, and heating and cooling for buildings.

Of course, the zero-carbon tools we have today aren’t distributed evenly across these sectors. In some sectors, like electricity, we’ve made a great deal of progress. In others, like agriculture and manufacturing, we’ve made much less. To compare progress across the board, I use what I call the Green Premium, which is the difference in cost between the clean way of doing something and the conventional way that produces emissions. 

For example, sustainable aviation fuel now costs more than twice as much as conventional jet fuel, so it has a Green Premium of over 100%. Solar and wind power have grown quickly because in many cases they’re cheaper than conventional sources of electricity—that is, they have a negative Green Premium. 

The Green Premium isn’t purely financial. To be competitive, clean alternatives also need to be as practical as what they’re replacing. Far more people will buy EVs once you can charge one up as quickly as you can fill your tank with gasoline.

I think the Green Premium is the best way to identify areas of great impact. Where it’s high, as in the case of jet fuel, we need innovators and investors to jump on the problem. Where it’s low or even negative, we need to overcome the barriers that are keeping the technologies from reaching a global scale.

A new technology has to overcome a lot of challenges to beat the incumbents, but being able to compete on cost is absolutely essential. So if I could offer one piece of advice to every company working on zero-carbon technologies, it would be to focus on lowering and eliminating the Green Premium in whatever sector you’ve chosen. Think big. If your technology can be competitive enough to eventually eliminate at least 1% of global emissions per year—that’s 0.5 gigatons—you’re on the right track.

I’d encourage policymakers to bring this sector-by-sector focus on the Green Premium to their work, too. They should also protect funding for clean technologies and the policies that promote them. This is not just a public good: The countries that win the race to develop these breakthroughs will create jobs, hold enormous economic power for decades to come, and become more energy independent.

In addition, young scientists and entrepreneurs should think about how they can put their skills toward these challenges. It’s an exciting time—the people who begin a career in clean technology today will have an enormous impact on human welfare. If you need pointers, the Climate Tech Atlas published last month by Breakthrough Energy and other partners is an excellent guide to the technologies that are essential for decarbonizing the economy and helping people adapt to a warmer climate.

Finally, I’d encourage investors to put serious money into companies with technologies that can meaningfully reduce the Green Premium. Consider it an investment in what will be the biggest growth industry of the 21st century. Companies have made dramatic progress on better and cleaner solutions in every sector; what many of them need now is private-sector capital and partnerships to help them reach the scale at which they’ll have a real impact on emissions.

So if I could offer one piece of advice to every company working on zero-carbon technologies, it would be to focus on lowering and eliminating the Green Premium in whatever sector you’ve chosen.

Transforming the entire physical economy is an unprecedented task, and it can only be accomplished through markets—by supporting companies with breakthrough ideas that beat fossil fuels on cost and practicality. It’s going to take investors who are both patient and willing to accept the risk that some companies will fail. Of course, governments and nonprofits have a role in the energy transition too, but ultimately, our success will hinge on climate innovators’ ability to build profitable companies. 

If we get this right—and I believe we will—then in the next decade, we’ll see fewer news stories about missed emissions targets and more stories about how emissions are dropping fast because the world invented and deployed breakthrough ideas: clean liquid fuels that power passenger jets and cargo ships; neighborhoods built with zero-emissions steel and cement; fusion plants that generate an inexhaustible supply of clean electricity. 

Not only will emissions fall faster than most people expect, but hundreds of millions of people will be able to get affordable, reliable clean energy—with especially dramatic improvements for low-income countries. More people will have access to air-conditioning for extremely hot days. More children will have lights so they can do their homework at night. More health clinics will be able to keep their vaccines cold so they don’t spoil. We’ll have built an economy where everyone can prosper.

Of course, climate change will still present many challenges. But the advances we make in the coming years can ensure that everyone gets a chance to live a healthy and productive life no matter where they’re born, and no matter what kind of climate they’re born into.

Bill Gates is a technologist, business leader, and philanthropist. In 1975, he cofounded Microsoft with his childhood friend Paul Allen, and today he is chair of the Gates Foundation, a nonprofit fighting poverty, disease, and inequity around the world. Bill is the founder of Breakthrough Energy, an organization focused on advancing clean energy innovation, and TerraPower, a company developing groundbreaking nuclear energy and science technologies. He has three children.

2025 Climate Tech Companies to Watch: HiNa Battery Technology and its effort to commercialize salt cells

HiNa Battery Technology is a trailblazer in developing and mass-producing batteries using sodium, a widely available element that can be extracted from sea salt. The startup’s products—already powering small vehicles and energy storage plants in China—provide a valuable alternative to lithium-based batteries, made with materials mined and processed in just a few countries.

Over the next few decades the world will need a lot more batteries to power electric cars and keep grids stable. Today most battery cells are made with lithium, so the mineral is expected to be in hyper demand, leading to supply chain risks: 85% of the global lithium supply will be refined in just three countries in 2030—China, Chile, and Argentina, according to the International Energy Agency.

But a new technology has come on the scene, potentially disrupting the global battery industry. Sodium-ion cells are made with an element 400 times more abundant than lithium. It can be found and extracted pretty much anywhere there is seawater or salt deposits in the ground, and harvesting it is a centuries-old practice. For decades, research of the technology was abandoned due to the huge commercial success of lithium-ion cells. Now, HiNa Battery Technology is working to bring sodium back to the limelight—and to the mass market. 

Led by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, HiNa’s goal is to commercialize sodium-ion technology in an industry dominated by lithium. To deliver that, it has built labs to develop its own chemistries and factories to make cells at scale. 

HiNa began mass manufacturing last year, bringing two sodium-ion products to market. One is a cube-shaped battery for storing electricity; it’s already powering commercial-scale energy storage stations in China, including one in Hubei Province that began operation in July 2024. The other product is a cylindrical battery already being used in electric mopeds (which are ubiquitous in China) and other small vehicles. 

Compared to their lithium counterparts, sodium-ion batteries perform better in cold environments and can charge faster, but they have lower energy density. This means a sodium-ion battery carries less energy than a lithium-ion battery of the same size—a problem for cars, since that means shorter range. 

HiNa says it will continue to increase its products’ energy density through technological innovations, such as by using more-efficient materials for the cathode and anode and improving batteries’ structure. Currently, the energy density of its cube-shaped battery is 165 watt-hours per kilogram—around 80% of that of a lithium iron phosphate battery, the mainstream lithium battery in China.


Key indicators

  • Industry: Energy storage
  • Founded: 2017
  • Headquarters: Beijing, China
  • Notable fact: HiNa was founded by Chen Liquan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and three of his students, with support from the academy. Chen is dubbed “the father of Chinese lithium batteries” for leading a team that developed the country’s first such cell three decades ago. At 85, Chen still oversees HiNa’s research and development with one of the students—the company’s chairman, Hu Yongsheng. 

Potential for impact

The global sodium-ion market is still in its infancy, and its future is uncertain, but HiNa’s endeavor has provided a potential solution for the world to achieve net-zero carbon emissions without overly relying on a handful of critical minerals, whose production has drawn environmental, humanitarian, and geopolitical concerns. 

In the energy storage sector—sodium-ion batteries’ main area of usage—they are expected to grab up to 30% of the global market by 2030. The 50-megawatt energy storage plant in Hubei Province alone is projected to avoid an estimated 13,000 tons of carbon dioxide every year, which is roughly equivalent to removing about 3,000 gas-powered cars from the road. 

Caveats

HiNa faces a big question: Can sodium-ion batteries thrive commercially? Lithium-ion cells are projected to remain cheaper and more powerful in the foreseeable future. The unit price of sodium-ion batteries is currently about 60% higher than that of lithium ones, but their theoretical production cost should eventually be around a third lower than that of lithium-ion cells. Industry analysts say HiNa and other sodium-ion battery makers must ensure that customers can get more bang for their bucks in order to create a market.

Chinese lithium-battery behemoths are also making moves into sodium, upping pressure on specialist companies like HiNa. CATL, the world’s largest battery maker, has said it will mass-produce sodium-ion batteries for electric cars by the end of this year. Meanwhile, EV giant BYD is building a massive factory in eastern China dedicated to making sodium-ion cells. 

Next steps

HiNa’s plan is to focus on a few submarkets. It says that sectors such as heavy trucks and energy storage represent huge potential because of China’s big domestic market.  

The company aims to launch a fast-charging sodium-ion battery that powers heavy trucks this month. The battery can fully charge in just 20 minutes, according to HiNa. The feature is expected to be a draw for truck drivers, who cannot afford long pit stops.

How we picked promising climate tech companies in an especially unsettling year

MIT Technology Review’s reporters and editors faced a dilemma as we began to mull nominees for this year’s list of Climate Tech Companies to Watch.

How do you pick companies poised to succeed in a moment of such deep uncertainty, at a time when the new Trump administration is downplaying the dangers of climate change, unraveling supportive policies for clean technologies, and enacting tariffs that will boost costs and disrupt supply chains for numerous industries? 

We as a publication are focused more on identifying companies developing technologies that can address the escalating threats of climate change, than on businesses positioned purely for market success. We don’t fancy ourselves as stock pickers or financial analysts.

But we still don’t want to lead our readers astray by highlighting a startup that winds up filing for bankruptcy six months later, even if its demise is due to a policy whiplash outside of its control.

So we had to shift our thinking some.

As a basic principle, we look for companies with the potential to substantially drive down greenhouse gas emissions or deliver products that could help communities meaningfully reduce the dangers of heatwaves, droughts, or other extreme weather.

We prefer to feature businesses that have established a track record, by raising capital, building plants, or delivering products. We generally exclude companies where the core business involves extracting and combusting fossil fuels, even if they have a side business in renewables, as well as those tied to forced labor or other problematic practices.

Our reporters and contributors add their initial ideas to a spreadsheet. We ask academics, investors, and other sources we trust for more nominees. We research and debate the various contenders, add or subtract from our list, then research and debate them all some more. 

Starting with our first climate tech list in 2023, we have strived to produce a final mix of companies that’s geographically diverse. But given the particular challenges for the climate tech space in the US these days, one decision we made early on was to look harder and more widely for companies making strides elsewhere.  

Thankfully, numerous other nations continue to believe in the need to confront rising threats and the economic opportunities in doing so.

China, in particular, has seized on the energy transition as a pathway for expanding its economy and global influence, giving rise to some of the world’s largest and most innovative clean tech companies. That includes two on this year’s list: the sodium-ion battery company HiNa and the wind-turbine giant Envision.

Similarly, the European Union’s increasingly strict emissions mandates and cap-and-trade system are accelerating efforts to clean up the energy, heavy-industry, and transportation sectors across that continent. We highlighted two promising companies there, including the German electric truck company Traton and the Swedish clean-cement maker Cemvision.

We also determined that certain businesses could emerge relatively unscathed from the shifting conditions in the US, or perhaps even benefit from them. Notably, the fact that heightened tariffs will boost the cost of importing critical minerals could create an advantage for a company like Redwood Materials, one of the US’s biggest recyclers of battery materials.

Finally, the boom in AI data center development is opening some promising opportunities, as it spawns vast demands for new electricity generation. Several of our picks are well positioned to help meet those needs through carbon-free energy sources, including geothermal company Fervo Energy and next-generation nuclear startup Kairos Power. Plus, Redwood Materials has launched a new microgrid business line to help address those demands as well.

Still, it was especially challenging this year to produce a list we felt confident enough to put out into the world, which is a key reason why we decided to narrow it down from 15 companies to 10. 

But we believe we’ve identified a solid slate of firms around the world that are making real strides in cleaning up the way we do business and go about our lives, and which are poised to help us meet the rising climate challenges ahead.

We hope you think so too.

2025 Climate Tech Companies to Watch: Pairwise and its climate-adapted crops

Climate change will make it increasingly difficult to grow crops across many parts of the world. Pairwise is leveraging CRISPR gene editing to develop plants that can better withstand adverse conditions.

Pairwise uses cutting-edge gene editing to produce crops that can withstand increasingly harsh climate conditions, helping to feed a growing population even as the world warms.

The seven-year-old startup was cofounded by several gene editing pioneers, including MIT’s Feng Zhang and Harvard’s David Liu, who helped invent and improve the breakthrough CRISPR tool.

Last year, the company delivered the first food to the US market, that was developed with the precise genetic scissors, a less-bitter–tasting mustard green. It’s now working to produce crops with climate-resilient traits, through partnerships with two of the world’s largest plant biotech companies, Bayer and Corteva.

Pairwise says its technology enables the company and its customers to efficiently introduce and fine-tune new plant traits. The toolkit includes a proprietary CRISPR enzyme (the part of the technology that snips off bits of DNA), as well as a base editor, a second-generation CRISPR technology that can alter a single DNA letter. Co-founder Liu first developed it with his research team.  

Among its early efforts, the company is developing and field testing shorter, sturdier types of corn, blackberries and other crops that could survive high winds and other extreme weather events amplified by climate change. 

The company believes that these dwarf plants can be grown closer together, potentially enabling farmers to produce higher yields with less fertilizer and fewer insecticides. Growing more plants on a given area of land, or shrinking fruit trees closer to bush size, also means it could be more economical to grow their crops in agricultural hoop houses. These temporary, movable greenhouses can be covered with plastic or shade cloth to control growing conditions. That, in turn, could enable more farmers, particularly in poorer parts of the world, to protect their crops from heatwaves and other severe weather. 

In addition, Pairwise is working with the Gates Foundation to create new varieties of high-yield yams in Nigeria. It has also licensed its suite of genetic tools to Mars to help the confectionary giant develop cacao plants that would be more resilient to plant diseases and shifting climate conditions. The cacao trees, which farmers predominantly grow in West Africa, are coming under increasing stress from rising temperatures and erratic rainfall patterns. 


Key indicators

  • Industry: Food and agriculture 
  • Founded: 2018 
  • Headquarters: Durham, North Carolina, US
  • Notable fact: The company was cofounded by several scientists who were instrumental in inventing and improving CRISPR, including MIT professor Feng Zhang and Harvard professor David Liu, both of whom also have appointments at the Broad Institute.

Potential for impact

As climate change fuels more extreme weather and creates otherwise harsher conditions such as drought, the ability to grow crops with the same or higher yields than are seen today could help sustain farmers and feed communities. Particularly in some of the hottest and poorest parts of the world, climate-adapted crops promise to prevent hunger and starvation.

Caveats

To date, Pairwise hasn’t delivered any climate-adapted foods to the market. So it remains to be seen how big of a difference such plants will make in the fields and on store shelves.

There’s a general, if untested, hope that consumers and regulators will be more accepting of CRISPR-edited crops, which involve editing the plant’s own DNA, than many have been of transgenic crops, which are created by swapping in genes from another species. 

Next steps

Pairwise representatives say the company, which has raised $155 million to date, is evaluating short-stature blackberries in field trials now. If those tests go well, it intends to work on squatter fruit trees as well, such as cherry or peach. 

On its website, the company says it has successfully demonstrated edits in 14 crops, and completed field trials for at least two more: unspecified varieties of corn and soy.

Pairwise hasn’t announced any specific timelines, but the company says it expects to deliver a variety of “climate-adapted, delicious and consumer-loved crops” in the coming years.

2025 Climate Tech Companies to Watch: Cemvision and its low-emissions cement

Cement is one of the most used materials on the planet, and the industry emits billions of tons of greenhouse gasses annually. Cemvision wants to use waste materials and alternative fuels to help reduce climate pollution from cement production.

Today, making cement requires crushing limestone and heating it to super high temperatures, usually by burning fossil fuels. The chemical reactions also release carbon dioxide pollution. 

Swedish startup Cemvision made a few key production changes to reduce both emissions and the need to mine new materials. First, the company is moving away from Portland cement, the most common form of the material used currently. 

Making Portland cement requires reaching ultra-high temperatures, over 1,450 °C (2,650 °F). Instead, Cemvision makes a material that requires lower temperatures (roughly 1,200 °C, or 2,200 °F), which reduces the amount of energy required. 

The company also uses alternative sources for heating. Rather than fossil fuels, Cemvision can use a combination of plasma, hydrogen, and electricity. The startup tested its process in a demonstration-scale kiln, which can make up to 12 tons per day. The material has a high strength under compression and doesn’t heat up much when it’s mixed with water, both desirable qualities for builders. 

Cemvision also has a strong focus on building a circular economy. The company’s cement incorporates waste materials like mine tailings and slag, a by-product of iron and steel manufacturing. And it recently published results showing that it can use steel slag from electric arc furnaces and basic oxygen furnaces. These materials reduce the need for newly-mined limestone and other virgin materials, cutting down on the carbon dioxide emitted from that material in chemical reactions taking place in the kiln. 


Key indicators

  • Industry: Cement
  • Founded: 2019
  • Headquarters: Stockholm, Sweden
  • Notable fact: Cemvision was a member of the Breakthrough Energy Fellows program and the Norrsken accelerator program, started by Klarna cofounder Niklas Adalberth.

Potential for impact

The cement industry today accounts for about 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Cemvision’s process can reduce emissions by between 80% and 95% compared to traditional cement-making by using waste materials and alternative fuels. 

The company has partnerships with builders and industrial customers, including in construction and mining. 

Caveats

Cemvision’s material will be more expensive than conventional cement, so it’ll require either policy support or customers who are willing to pay more. The European Union has a policy system that charges for pollution, and that should help make Cemvision’s cement competitive. The company says its product will be less expensive than one of the leading methods of cleaning up cement, carbon capture and sequestration. 

The cement industry is quite conservative, and there’s often resistance to new technologies, including adopting materials other than Portland cement. Cemvision’s cement will need to gain wide acceptance to make progress on emissions. 

Next steps

Cemvision has a site selected and is currently raising money to finance a full-scale plant in Northern Europe. That facility will have a capacity of 500,000 metric tons annually, and the company says it should open by 2028. 

2025 Climate Tech Companies to Watch: Traton and its electric trucks

As Europe gradually phases out heavy-duty diesel trucks, Traton is gearing up production of its electric models. The company is also helping to install hundreds of public chargers to aid the growth of electric freight transport across Europe. 

Every day, trucks carry many millions of tons of cargo down roads and highways around the world. Nearly all run on diesel and make up one of the largest commercial sources of carbon emissions. Traton is producing a wide variety of zero-emission trucks that could help clean up this sector while also investing in a Europe-wide advanced charging network so other manufacturers can more easily follow suit. 

In Europe especially, the next decade could see tremendous growth in electric truck adoption. New CO2 emission standards require new diesel trucks to essentially be phased out of production by 2040. And given that trucks typically operate for around 15 years, more owners will be considering electric models for their next purchase. 

Today, Traton is a company in transition. A subsidiary of Volkswagen, it is made up of a collection of commercial vehicle brands, including Scania, MAN, and International. While it still manufactures conventional trucks that run on fossil fuels, it’s making rapid progress in the EV space. Some of Scania’s long-haul electric semis can travel about 350 miles before needing to recharge, for example. 

Its EV models are also starting to pick up in terms of sales. In the first half of 2025, Traton sold 1,250 electric models globally, which was twice as many as during the same period last year. That puts it not far behind Volvo, another market leader. Traton is now ramping up production—MAN recently opened a new factory line that can assemble electric and diesel trucks interchangeably. That should also help bring costs down, key to success for the sector—today, the price of an electric truck can be several times higher than for diesel ones. 

What’s more, Traton is working to install hundreds of publicly available chargers across Europe through an industry partnership called Milence. That group has also invested in high-powered chargers that can deliver more than 1 megawatt of power to heavy-duty trucks, allowing trucks to recharge in 45 minutes or less (for comparison, rapid chargers available for cars today deliver between 50 and 350 kilowatts).


Key indicators

  • Industry: Electric vehicles 
  • Founded: 2015 
  • Headquarters: Munich, Germany
  • Notable fact: One of Traton’s subsidiaries is a leading school bus manufacturer in the US and Canada, where it debuted its first electric school bus in 2021.

Potential for impact 

Moving freight produces about 8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Most of that pollution (65%) comes from trucks and vans—more than cargo ships, trains, and planes combined. And the World Economic Forum expects demand for road freight will triple by 2050

Electric trucks do have a climate impact from the mining and manufacturing processes required to build them. The source of electricity that powers them—whether renewable or fossil fuels—also matters. Even so, battery-electric trucks operating in Europe today reduce emissions on average by 63% compared with diesel trucks, according to an analysis by the nonprofit International Council on Clean Transportation. 

To mitigate climate change, the ICCT has said that all of the world’s major markets need to fully transition to selling only zero-emission trucks by 2040. Last year, about 90,000 electric trucks were sold globally; electric models accounted for less than 2.5 percent of total truck sales in the year prior. But market forces seem poised to accelerate this transition, and Traton is a small but growing player. 

Today, China leads the world in electric truck production and sales. In Europe, though, sales are expected to tick up as the EU requires manufacturers of heavy-duty rigs to slash CO2 emissions from their fleets by 90% by 2040, with progressive targets leading up to that level—the first of which kicked in as of July. 

Caveats

It’s early days for electric trucking, as supply chains and charging infrastructure are built out. A large electric truck requires four to six times as many battery packs as an electric car, and securing enough batteries has proven particularly difficult for many EV firms based outside of China, where most batteries are produced. 

To mitigate this risk, Traton is building its own battery production, starting with facilities in Södertälje, Sweden and Nuremberg, Germany—with plans to make 50,000 battery packs a year, which could power about 10,000 heavy-duty trucks. (The company declined to say what proportion of the batteries currently used in its trucks comes from China.) 

The company’s International brand, which operates in the US, could be hit by tariffs and see demand drop as the Trump administration moves to eliminate all greenhouse gas emissions standards for vehicles. 

No matter what, the competition will be fierce—every major European truck manufacturer offers electric models now, and Chinese firms have already expanded internationally and built a strong customer base in markets like South America through sales of electric buses. 

Next steps

For now, MAN is working toward its goal of delivering 1,000 electric trucks from its new manufacturing line by the year’s end. Looking ahead, Scania aims to begin selling its first heavy-duty truck compatible with megawatt chargers in February, with deliveries to follow later in the year. Through Milence, megawatt chargers are now available at three sites, in Sweden, Belgium, and the Netherlands, and will soon be installed at five more.