Episode 163: Scott Clavenna, GreenTech Media
Today's guest is Scott Clavenna, Co-Founder of Greentech Media.
Greentech Media was a leading source of integrated news, industry research, conferences, and executive councils in the clean energy economy. Wood Mackenzie, who acquired Greentech Media in 2016, announced it would close the publication earlier this year.
In 2007, Scott founded Greentech Media and served as CEO for a decade. During that time, GTM was devoted to enabling the growth of cleantech worldwide with a mix of market research, news, and events. Wood Mackenzie acquired Greentech Media in 2016, and, the following year, Scott took on a new role as Chairman of Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables. As Chairman, he contributed to the strategic guidance of Wood Mackenzie's work in the global energy transition. Since leaving Wood Mackenzie, Scott is working with Stephen Lacey's Post Script Audio to produce climate-focused podcasts. Their shows include Greentech Media's Energy Gang and The Interchange as well as A Matter of Degrees hosted by Leah Stokes and The Big Switch hosted by Melissa Lott.
In this episode, Scott takes me through Greentech Media's inception, his climate journey, and lessons learned from cleantech 1.0. We also dive into a lively discussion about the inability to uncouple policy and climatetech, why Scott is optimistic about the future, and the power of telling climate stories. Scott's unique perch allowed him to see a wide variety of climate solutions, making him a fantastic guest.
Enjoy the show!
You can find me on twitter @jjacobs22 or @mcjpod and email at info@mcjcollective.com, where I encourage you to share your feedback on episodes and suggestions for future topics or guests.
Episode recorded June 14th, 2021
In Today's episode we cover:
Scott's climate journey and why he married on digital media and journalism with market research
The initial wave of cleantech, lessons learned from a media angle, and where GTM fit in the landscape in the late 00s
Why investments from traditional tech VCs shrank in the late 00s
What makes Scott optimistic for cleantech 2.0
The core demographic of GTM consumers and how that demographic changed as the company found its footing
The distinction between Cleantech and Climatetech
The connection between ad tech and policy
Advice Scott has for those with senior-level experience in other industries who want to make the shift to climate
Why you can't uncouple policy and cleantech
Government mandates and the policy needed to address climate change
What Scott is up to now and the power of telling a climate story
Scott's anti-capitalist past and how mission and impact drive his journey
Links to topics discussed in this episode:
-
Jason Jacobs: Hey everyone, Jason here. I am the My Climate Journey show host. Before we get going, I want to take a minute and tell you about the My Climate Journey or MCJ, as we call it, membership option. Membership came to be because there were a bunch of people that were listening to the show, that weren't just looking for education, but they were longing for a peer group as well. So we set up a Slack Community for those people that's now mushroomed into more than 1,300 members. There's an application to become a member. It's not an exclusive thing, there's four criteria we screen for, determination to tackle the prime of climate change, ambition to work on the most impactful solution areas, optimism that we can make a dent and we're not wasting your time for trying, and a collaborative spirit.
Beyond that, the more diversity, the better. There's a bunch of great things that have come out of that community. A number of founding teams that have met in there, a number of non-profits that have been established, a bunch of hiring that's been done, a bunch of companies that have raised capital in there, a bunch of funds that have gotten limited partners or investors for their funds in there, as well as a bunch of events and programming by members and for members, and some open-source projects that are getting actively worked on that hatched in there as well. At any rate, if you want to learn more, you can go to myclimatejourney.co, the website, and click the become a member tab at the top. Enjoy the show.
Hello everyone. This is Jason Jacobs and welcome to My Climate Journey. This show follows my journey to interview a wide range of guests to better understand and make sense of the formidable problem of climate change and try to figure out how people like you and I can help. Today's guest is Scott Clavenna, most recently chairman of Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables, where he contributed to the strategic guidance of Wood Mackenzie's work in the global energy transition. Prior to Wood Mackenzie, Scott was the co-founder and CEO of Greentech Media, helping it develop into the leading source of integrated news, industry research, conferences and executive councils in the clean energy economy before it was acquired by Wood Mackenzie in 2016. I've been waiting to have this discussion with Scott because very few people have the perspective that he does, starting in the traditional telecommunications world as an analyst, transitioning into clean tech, riding that wave and building one of the leading, if not the leading media property in the clean tech landscape, successfully exiting the company, taking some time off and now gearing up to do it again.
We have a great discussion in this one about Scott's motivations to get into clean tech, to begin with, the Greentech Media journey, the acquisition. We also talk about the industry landscape at the time, both when Scott entered the field and how it evolved as they were building the company, and then we talk about some of the similarities and some of the differences with the climate tech landscape today. Great discussion. I hope you enjoy it. Scott, welcome to the show.
Scott Clavenna: Hey, thanks Jason. Great to be here.
Jason Jacobs: Yeah. Well, I'm so psyched to catch up with you. We didn't have a chance to debrief before, before we hit record, which means that all the questions that I would've asked you anyways, I can just ask you on the show.
Scott Clavenna: Awesome. All right. Hit me.
Jason Jacobs: Well for starters, I mean, you and I have spoken before, but many listeners might not be familiar. So can you talk a bit about you and Greentech Media, and I know you're not there anymore, but it was such a big part of your life for so long. Maybe, maybe talk a bit about, you know, what it was and what you did there.
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, thanks. Well, so Greentech media back in 2007, we started that and I had been a telecommunications networks analyst. So I'd been doing a lot of market research and these are research over the years since 1991, I guess, on telecommunications industry, particularly on fiber optics. And really just got a love for doing industry research. I loved looking at technology trends, looking at technology substitution, how fiber optics replaced copper and how that enabled the infrastructure for the internet. So we watched all that happen through the '90s and, and I'd worked for a number of startups or kind of small businesses. And so I had also gotten a taste for working in a small entrepreneurial organization, working in small teams and working in a lot of modes, not just being an analyst, but also speaking at conferences, writing for trade journals and eventually digital media sites once that came around in 2000.
So I just kind of loved that whole information ecosystem of news and conferences and industry research and tying it all together. And I'd had some really good experiences in the past running my own little companies or, you know, working for some other entrepreneurial ones. And the cool thing was I, I felt like I had... By 2007, the company I was at had gone from startup to acquired, was called Light Reading. And, so I had seen the whole arc of a information business go from venture capital to growth and scale and all the ups and downs that happened with that, and a lot of lessons learned along the way that I got to learn sort of secondhand versus being the CEO of that one. I was the chief analyst. And with that then, and I had met venture capitalists along the way. I kind of knew how to talk to them and how to raise money.
So I, just, by 2007, I felt like peak confidence, right then like, you know what, if I put together a business plan, that's like this, I'll bet you, you know, we can go out there and make it work and sort of casting around for ideas. And we had a bunch of different ideas, because it really was a business model idea more than was right then a clean tech, green tech, you know, energy transition idea. So we were looking at supercomputing, looking at different things in telecom all over and.
Jason Jacobs: With what models Scott?
Scott Clavenna: This model of can you create an information ecosystem, that's digital media, that's tied to industry research and then bring together people through conferences as well? So that business model that we had at Greentech Media and that, that, you know, we sort of worked on at Light Reading before. That one, I really believed was a great business model and it was a lot of fun to work in too. Just being able to work in those different modes, I thought, it was a great way to stay really engaged as an analyst versus being stuck, just grinding out spreadsheets or anything like that. So I liked that idea that you could run a company, that was actually like a really engaging fun company to, to work at, that you really got to see the impact of your efforts on the industry that you're working in. So I wanted to find a way to do that on my own.
And yeah, it just came upon talking to my wife, talking to other people. You know, clean energy as a burgeoning area in 2007, and we were looking for these ingredients of, this kind of business model work, works really well in a market that has a lot of innovation going on, a certain amount of hype/confusion around those innovations, a decent amount of venture capital fueling that, because you need sort of the money to support it and show everyone that it's like a market worth their attention. You usually need some IPOs or some acquisitions. You need to see that like the market itself is working, that it's not just utterly speculative and far up, but it's a market that's kind of active and, and that there's some policy support behind it, that kind of thing. And certainly, in 2007, that's what it looked like. You know, solar was taking off, wind was taking off and there was a decent amount of talk around cap and trade and policy support and.
And we were like, wow, this is perfect. So let's jump in, and I think because I had those experiences in the past, I was able to... And, and particularly with Light Reading. That company, because it had a nice tight arc of seven years from founding to exit with a real clear growth path and benefit to the venture capitalist involved in that company, that I had a real nice reference to bring around and talk to people about. And then, the investors at that point knew me from the telecom industry.
And so, I mean, that's, that's still such, always the secret to raising money, unfortunately, is that, you know, having a name, having a track record, you know, knowing kind of how to talk about the, the growth plan, the risks, the how you're going to navigate those and how much money you need, like really understanding that, boy, made a huge difference. So we raised a million dollars pretty quickly as seed money and got off the ground. And I would say... So, it, it was great. Yeah. We hit the ground running with solar. We hooked up with a, a nonprofit research company here in Cambridge called Prometheus Institute, and they were doing some pretty innovative economic analysis of solar.
So instead of being just pure advocates around policy, their idea was if you really demonstrate rigorous economic analysis of solar, you will see that there's a certain inevitability about solar's economic advantage over any other fuels ultimately. And it was right at the time, because it's true today. So we kind of, we partnered with them and used that as our way to sort of announce to the industry that that's the kind of research we wanted to do. And so we started selling that, hired a couple editors, launched the website, you know, put on a conference by the end of the year and had a nice website design.
And, and, and the way we did our journalism was a little on the aggressive side, not typical trade journalism that can be just very supportive and sycophantic and, you know, raw, raw industry. We were pretty hard on a lot of the companies that were making claims that weren't well substantiated, and we always let our reporters be pretty aggressive because they had analysts in-house that they could, you know, reference for data and, and their own insights. So I think what we found that was so fun back then is that the industry, there wasn't a lot of competition. There wasn't that many real media outlets that were, you know, focused on that, you know, professional community, and.
So, we were just the cool kids in town and people really respected us because we were marrying research with journalism. And so, you could kind of get from us anything, daily news and insights that were ad supported, you know, free, or you could subscribe to the research and that's how we made most of our money.
And then ultimately, you could see us a few times a year at conferences. And so, there it went, we just were off and running, hit a bit of a bump in 2009 with the financial crisis. We sort of over-confidently believed it wouldn't impact renewable energy, because it was so hot and had its own, you know, tail end. It wasn't tied to real estate, but it did impact it because everything's tied to money. So if capital dries up, everything gets hurt. So we had to contract a little bit. We raised a second round and fortunately... So we got good terms on the second round. We had some good investors. The state of Massachusetts had a clean energy fund. So we got a million dollars from them and then kind of a family office in Germany and then some other smaller investors and got together that B round that was a little over three or 2.8 million, something like that.
And then we were just off and running. Then the, as the financial crisis eased and we had sort of made it through, then we were the, the hot place in town. And so we were just moving from solar to smart grid, to energy storage and just kept adding areas of coverage. And by the time 2015, 16 rolled around, we had lots of conferences, lots of research. We were profitable for a few years in a row and the house was really an order. And so, fortunately for us then in early 2016, Wood Mackenzie who had just been acquired by Verisk Analytics was very interested and sort of inspired to invest in renewable energy research house because they had focused almost exclusively on oil and gas and metals and mining, that kind of thing.
So it was a perfect coincidence. So we didn't really go out with an investment banker and shop ourselves around. That was like a, sort of an arranged marriage then. So, [laughs], you know, it worked great. We had a, a, a good time to meet them and work out the details and pretty easygoing negotiation and all that. So that happened in, in July, 2016. And then I stuck around till April of 2020 after that.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh [affirmative]. And you, you mentioned that there were some turbulent in 2009 with the financial markets. So, from a timing standpoint, how did all this align with what was going on in the initial wave of clean tech VC? So was that, was that prior to Greentech Media coming about?
Scott Clavenna: It was pretty coincident. I would say, like we were starting to write about solar and some of the other biofuels, some of the other hot areas in clean tech in 2007, 2008. And it was a nice, good fortune that that was hot in venture capital. And so that really drives a lot of interest in digital media, like keeping up with venture capital, investment news and insights into who's investing in what and what the different companies are. So, that worked out really well to just draw a lot of eyeballs to the site as a daily news thing. And then that, that was part of the business model that we really liked is that if you get a really good audience of readers of your website, then you've sort of created a, a channel to market your higher paid products too. And so, that's where we could really showcase what the analysts were doing. And that is in a way that that became sort of both a new site and a marketing engine for us. And it was just really nicely lined up with the, how well things are going in the industry.
Jason Jacobs: It seems like an, and correct me if I'm mistaken here, but that the financial crisis happened, but then while the broader economy recovered, clean tech then went on to go through a period of significant contraction. And so it seems like it was during that period of contraction that Greentech Media has its rise. Am I mixed up or do those timelines stay?
Scott Clavenna: Well, it depends on what you mean by contraction. So, deployments were going great. I would say the amount of venture capital going into the industry did contract and the number of acquisitions, never really was that great to begin with, and it certainly didn't pick up. So there wasn't... there weren't a lot of exits. There was a lot of disappointment in the venture capital community, but if you look at what the actual sort of quantity of solar and wind being installed to that period, it was always above our forecast. So partly because China was producing a lot of it. You know, it became a big just manufacturing and engineering problem that just companies of scale tackled. So it became less of a good time to be a clean tech entrepreneur innovator. But for the industry at large, because big global companies were driving deployments of solar and wind, it kept driving down costs and kept at least setting the table for the second wave of clean tech investments and, or even broader climate tech investments, because renewable energy kept getting cheaper and cheaper through that, just by the volumes that were going in then.
So that was good for us as a research firm because venture capitalists were never really our clients, that our clients were the actual, you know, manufacturers up and down the supply chain and then companies involved in deployment. So that part was actually doing really well and was very eager to get our research. So we kept growing through the downturn because of that, because we had something really valuable to give to those companies.
Jason Jacobs: And given that you had kind of a front row seat, I know, you know, contrary to what many venture capitalists believe, venture capital is only one small piece of the broader clean tech landscape, but from your seat, what is it that led to the contraction in venture capital and what key learnings did you take away from that formative time?
Scott Clavenna: The key learnings. Well, I mean, I think what happened was at least how we observed it is there just wasn't a sufficient sort of maturity and knowledge of the investments required to bring a lot of companies through their whole development process. And a lot of the partners that got excited about clean tech back in that day were just a few partners at a larger venture capital firm. And once some of their investments dried up, it's harder and harder to sell new ones up to the partnership because they're just not seeing the results. There aren't any IPOs, there aren't any acquisitions. Companies are needing hundreds of million dollars to get to scale, and there's not a clear line of sight to how the investors recoup that investment. And so I think part of it is just a sense back then that this was a much more difficult technical problem to solve and a much more expensive problem to solve than it first appeared.
It's nothing like, you know, software, IT or tech investments where you can, you know, take a, a product pretty quickly from concept to scale and, and the market is avidly consuming it. I mean the, the energy market, I think a lot of people, myself included, I, I was as naive and I was learning along the way. I came to this thinking it was another tech market and there would be the same 18 month buying cycles of new technology, the same electric utility lab would be just like Verizon's lab and tested for a year. And then, you know, order a half a billion dollars worth of the equipment, and we were, just sat there learning as we went like, oh my God, it doesn't happen at all. There's trials and pilots and four years later, they're still not even ready to make a purchase order.
And I think a lot of people in that whole ecosystem were kind of learning those same lessons at the, you know, in, in real time. And that's pretty frustrating to the venture capital community then, but I think we're starting to see a way out of that now. Because not all the investments are big iron investments anymore. You know, it's just such a multifaceted market and problem to solve, that everything doesn't need to be an investment in the next biofuel or the, the largest turbine or something like that. There's lots of areas that match the profile of venture capital better.
Jason Jacobs: And why do you think this time is different? What's... What changed that led to that landscape evolving?
Scott Clavenna: Well, I'm hopeful. I guess, I would say we're in this 2.0. I wouldn't say any the, there's, there's a lot of evidence that companies are all going to be wildly profitable and there's going to be a lot of great returns for their funds, but I'm hopeful now that a lot of what's caught up, policy has caught up, just the, the costs of renewable energy are so low that it's so competitive with fossil fuel and it's, it's less reliant on subsidies or support like that, which would turn off a venture capitalist. Because I think one of the things that they lived through was if a single state's policy changed a little bit, it would change the economic outlook for a, a product completely in that space. Or, you know, Germany reduces its feed-in tariff, the whole solar market contracts in Germany, you know, just like things that are outside of a entrepreneur's control that are of that scale are really scary if you're a, a VC.
And I, I get the sense now that there's a... the financial supply chain is more mature, the policy outlook isn't as sensitive, because the technology is so much cheaper and there are just so many more ways to invest in the clean tech ecosystem than there were in the past, that you don't always have to pick, you know, the most capital-intensive product like Tesla or something like that. Yeah, you, there's lots of less capital-intensive ways to make an impact here. So I'm hopeful. I wouldn't say that we're in some, we're in the salad days yet or anything, but it's definitely... it feels much better.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh [affirmative]. And the way we've been starting to see more and more talent pick their head up from other areas, looking to come in this direction, is that new or, or were you seeing that back when you were building Greentech Media as well?
Scott Clavenna: No, we saw that, we saw a lot of that. I'd say there's more areas, there's more opportunities to come in from other industries. So that's probably the absolute volume is much higher, but in the solar industry, there are a lot of people from even the fiber optics industry I was in, because some of those same technologies around photodiodes and fiber optics are basically tiny solar panels. So a lot of the optical technology was quite useful to improve inefficiency of solar panels. So we saw some of that. In smart grade, you see a lot of IT in software, intelligence coming from the tech market into the smart, distributed infrastructure of utilities. So, there were definitely lots of ways to get involved then, and we were seeing it.
But I just think it's so broad now that almost any industry you're in, you have some adjacency to the climate tech. So almost anyone where you're finding this, you know, in any industry can raise their head up and look around and say, hey, you know, there's a place for either my skills or my company, or, you know, some kind of innovation here.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh [affirmative]. And did your core customers tend to be people that had been in the industry for a long time prior or did you also cater to the new people who were looking to enter the field?
Scott Clavenna: I would say most were that sort of mid-sized peer play, at the beginning. Most were the, the pure play solar or smart grid or energy storage companies. So not the big energy companies, not a VP or something like that and not too many startups because they just don't have the money, but a lot in the middle. The SunPowers of the world and inverter companies, you know, Enphase and Sungrow and those guys, those were like our bread and butter, because they were a hundred percent focused on this market and they needed to know both upstream pricing and technologies and downstream deployment data. So we had the complete answer for anyone inside that company, how to be more strategic or competitive.
Jason Jacobs: Other than just the different words of clean tech and climate tech, I mean, are those just synonyms with slightly different word choices or are there differences in the definitions from your seat?
Scott Clavenna: Well, yeah, there's definitely differences. I mean, a lot of clean tech was technically focused, like really solving some kind of engineering problem around how to make solar more efficient or, or wind turbines, more efficient or, you know, migrate the, the grid from analog to digital. So those were real key technical challenges that need to be overcome. And even the, you know, a lot of battery companies were just trying different chemistries. I do feel like now there's more of a focus, a bigger systems approach and with systems and a broader thing of like what counts as a system, you know. Air and water and agriculture and transportation and livable cities. Like some of these systems are so big that it's not exactly you come up with a particular technology and you know, a better stoplight to improve traffic or something. A lot of it is just much broader systems thinking that, just opens up so many different ways to think about it.
Even, you know, Lime bikes or whatever. It's just lots of ways to think about how one lives sustainably, opens just tons more doors. That said, I will... were thinking back on Greentech Media. One of the things that made us really, just as a company, so even, you know, with a, a kaleidoscope of options to choose from, even back in clean tech 1.0, one of the things I think that was key to our success was we really just picked our spots. We never did any research on wind.
We really just went really deep on solar and smart grid and energy storage, you know, for nine years, where we had, we could have jumped into smart cities and water and ag and a lot of those things that were... you know, biofuels, any of that along the way. And we even tried, you know, we added a few channels here and there, then we pulled back, that we found it was much better just as a company, making our own decisions about how to be competitive and profitable was to just pick our spots.
So even if I were to do this again, I wouldn't necessarily say Greentech 2.0 would be, let's add all the things I just mentioned, you know, building materials and livable cities and all that kind of stuff. I'd still think the key is, is really helps to be deep, to be the absolute expert on, you know, a particular area.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh [affirmative]. And so, given that every sector needs to decarbonize, I mean, climate tech isn't really an industry because it, it encompasses decarbonizing aviation, but aviation is the industry. It encompasses decarbonizing mining, but mining is the industry. It, it encompasses decarbonizing transportation, but ground transportation, but like trains or cars like that or trucks like that, that's the industry. And so, given that and given what you just said about the importance of focus, should climate specific entities exist at all, or should it just be sector specific with an eye towards what's happening in, in climate?
Scott Clavenna: Well, yeah, that's a great question. I mean, that's what I'm thinking. If I were to do this again, I think I would, from a research perspective, I would really pick a couple spots and be the go-to source for that. I think there are ways to be broad because a lot of what you learn from, you know, the assistance approach in one area is actually really, it can be valuable to understand another one. So there's a lot of cross learnings that can go on. But like I said, if I were to do this again, I would definitely pick spots or launch independent sites that would go very deep into those industries, because, uh, that's what I found the entire, you know, 13 years at GTM is even inside Wood Mackenzie, where we were then, very broad.
You know, global, every molecule through electron, we covered. Still, our clients that stuck with us and, you know, renewed and enjoyed the service where they were always really focused on how deep we were in a particular area. Because most of the time, you're helping someone at their job solve a problem, or answer a call from an executive for, you know, should we enter this market or should we invest in this technology? And the only way to answer that effectively is to be really deep, have very deep and be an expert in it, and uh, you know, sort of a peer level advisor to them.
So climate tech as a practice is probably cool if you're a venture capitalist, because you want to look at everything and you want to see where all the, the innovations are. Probably, you know, it's good if you're a big nonprofit that wants to influence policy where policy can be at that scale, but, like I said, if I were doing this again, I would definitely pick a few spots and just go deep again.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh [affirmative]. And what does that mean for whether it's a traditional tech founder, who, the way you were a traditional tech analyst and then migrated your way into clean energy? So the traditional tech founders that are coming in that don't necessarily have expertise in, in any of these domains or the journalist or the lawyer or the CFO or whoever. I mean, when you see them heading this way, given that they don't have expertise anywhere, I mean, does that-
Scott Clavenna: They probably care [laughs].
Jason Jacobs: ... [crosstalk 00:27:39] like excited or d-does that make you roll your eyes or?
Scott Clavenna: Well.
Jason Jacobs: How do you feel about this new blood that's, that's heading into quote unquote, "climate tech"?
Scott Clavenna: That, that's a good question. I mean, I think everyone probably does have some expertise because these things aren't... like really, all the climate areas aren't an entirely specialized concept in a vacuum. So I think everyone does have... you know, anyone who's in chemistry would have some knowledge of battery, you know, how to understand, you know, making better batteries, and, and the like, as we found different technologies have adjacencies. But we did find back in those days, there was a dearth of executives, like CEOs who really knew how to run a company appropriately in an energy market.
And that's where I think there was a shortage then, and I have a, if I were to guess where the problem is going to lie here, is someone who's been a, a CEO. So there's a, there's a company gets started, they have tech founders, there's an innovation to bring in out of a lab or out of, you know, where have you, and they're ready to take on venture capital and scale up and they need... Ideally, if the, if the tech founder, you know, his, that's not his strength to be also the fundraiser and, you know, the growth driver of the company, like finding CEOs that can just parachute in from another industry and know how to navigate that new industry, that, I actually found was the hard part.
Because people did not understand the electric utilities, you know, the policy world they lived in, the constraints of being a monopoly, the constraints of how they have to serve everyone affordably. And, you know, still at the same time, take risks with the, with technologies. Like I said, the investment cycles required to scale up. Some of these companies aren't, aren't the same as in other industries. So I don't know how that's going now, but my guess is that's always going to be a bottleneck or at least a lag time is finding really good executives that can scale up these companies and really lead them from just the, that small, early stage to a larger growth company.
Because these, these industries are really different. And I, I was, like I said, I learned that along the way myself. It was... We had to make lots of reframing in the way we thought about our company, as we learned what the... And this was just electricity, but, you know, we're talking about all the industries now.
Jason Jacobs: Now, given some of the PTSD, for lack of a better word, that some of the people have that were working in clean tech in the startup side at the time, or the investor side at the time when lots of money was lost, what I've noticed is that there's certain allergic reactions, certain kind of cynical views, et cetera, that are, you know, that are real hard earned battle scars. Do you think that, that always makes the antenna sharper or do you think that sometimes unbridled optimism is required to come into an area that maybe the, where there has been failure in the past and actually make it work?
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, I'm a big believer in unbridled optimism. I mean, I think there's like a necessary sort of state your brain has to be to really push a company in its early days that you just believe it's going to work and, you know, the hurdles you hit don't get you depressed and make irrational pivots and, and the likes. So I think that's a good thing, but there are like economic realities or market realities to some of these that, I guess, I don't know if all of them are equally suited to tech innovation being the focus solution for de-carbonization, for, you know, addressing the climate crisis. I mean, some of these, I would just prefer to see brute force policy mandate things rather than hope various technologies, you know, influence markets and those markets adapt and we get there. My worry about this whole industry right now, especially even at successful second clean tech wave is it gives people the impression that technology is coming to the rescue and now the investors are shrewder and capital markets are more efficient in their allocation of money to that.
I think the problem is when that framing it, that a market-based solution will equitably and effectively address something on the scale of climate change. It's just very worrisome to me. I would rather have that be just out here, feeding a larger program. That is an absolute top-down mandated. We're all going to die. We need to fix this at a policy level or else, you know. So I, I've, I've sort of, I guess in the year since Greentech Media was acquired, I went through a little phase of, oddly, even though being successful at raising money, growing a company, having it acquired it a, a good multiple, I went through a bit of a phase of being an anticapitalist because just watching that process and watching sort of parallel processes occur and, and how difficult or how wedded one can be to that as a framework for a solution of just investing, growing, getting it acquired, actually found that to be kind of frustratingly short-sighted and inequitable. And I, I'm more sensitive to like getting climate change solved as a big global problem. That's not a tech problem, exclusively.
Jason Jacobs: So let's role play for a minute. I mean, if I'm, let's say an ad tech founder who built an ad tech company over the last 10 years, and either it exited successfully, or I did succession planning and brought in a new CEO to take it to the next level, but for whatever reason, I'm free. I want to make my next chapter about purpose. I can't imagine a more purposeful problem than climate change. Hey, Scott, you've been in this world a long time, would you mind it, you know? Can I quote unquote, "pick your brain" and can we meet over coffee or, you know, a coffee Zoom or whatever, what do you say to that person? Do you say, well, that's noble and all, but I think you should just build another ad tech company, because really policy is how this is going to get addressed, if at all?
Scott Clavenna: Not at all. There's a, the nice... there's a nice connection with ad tech and policy. Like if they really want to be involved, I think it's think about what you're really good at, and if ad tech is a thing, you know, just that background in, in sort of digital tech and the internet ecosphere, like if that's something that there's a special talent in, that to me, there's lots of options to think about leveraging that at a nonprofit focused on policy. I mean, you name it. There's lots of ways you could make the connection from that versus experience to policy or potentially even in a tech company that kind of knowledge could further their marketing or, you know, if it's customer service, what have you. There's, there's lots of ways you can make the connection. I, I guess, over coffee, I'd be figuring out what really were their strengths, if they're sick of it and they want to get into something completely new, or if there's passions there that you could connect with what they know.
But my first, the light bulb that went on just as we were talking about that, is like this should, you know, that person, I'd love to get them involved in policy, advocacy, advocacy, that kind of thing. Because that's... Policy doesn't happen without that, so I can't just say this is a policy problem, not a, not just an engineering problem. So, policy makers are responsible for it, and they kind of, they react to those pressures. So the more effective we are in keeping that pressure up the better.
Jason Jacobs: And what if let's say I was involved neck deep in AI and robotics, but focused on an area that has nothing to do with climate, but my inkling was that there are going to be more and more opportunities to leverage AI and robotics, to find ways to do things greener, cleaner, more efficiently, lower costs, and ultimately reduce the emissions footprint of, of those sectors and, and those activities. I guess, speak to that person. Like, so what I'm getting at here is that I understand that there's some areas where you're going to need policy intervention, but at least from my seat, everything needs to be fundamentally rewired. And so yeah, you need to kind of find your spot, but there's ample spots and tons of room-
Scott Clavenna: Yeah [laughs].
Jason Jacobs: ... for innovation and so-
Scott Clavenna: So.
Jason Jacobs: ... so, I guess I'm just confused and, yeah.
Scott Clavenna: No, was that AI for security? No, no, I, I would be a hundred percent. There's plenty of AI jobs for you in this field. Absolutely. Oh my God. Yeah. We can make everything more efficient and more intelligent and you know, we're just getting started. The electric grid is still just a ridiculous, you know, incredibly valuable and fascinating machine, but it's so old. And so, I would definitely point them toward the smart grid first and then who knows where else, there's thousands of places. If it's a tech person, absolutely, follow those passions. But I think at the same time, I guess my bigger point is I just wouldn't want to have the public's perception that the tech people are on it, it's okay.
They're working hard and just wait and you know, miracle happens here. They'll have it fixed in, you know, 10, 20 years. And you, you don't have to really think hard about policy or the like that... like the tech's coming down the pike and we'll all be driving EVs and.
Jason Jacobs: Yeah, I just don't know why it's either although it's the same thing I hear about offsets for example. And it's like, well, but offsets, there's no additionality and the quality and the transparency and the incentives. And it's like, and most importantly, and this is where, where people really pound the table, it gives people an excuse to continue doing what they're doing and inaction.
Scott Clavenna: [laughs].
Jason Jacobs: And it's like, well, wait a minute. So look, the quality and incentives and transparency and additionality, like those are real problems. Let's lay them out and let's figure out what a better carbon market looks like that's healthier and let's focus on getting it there. And those people over there with the excuse for an action, let's make sure that they understand that inaction is not an option-
Scott Clavenna: Absolutely.
Jason Jacobs: ... and let's follow that up with mandates and timelines and structure and carrot and sticking and all those things. But let's not throw the baby out with the bath water and say, therefore, we shouldn't do any offsets because some of these industries are going to take a long time to decarbonize whether we like it or not. And there's a lot we can do in the meantime to do better along the way. So I don't know. I'm kind of-
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, we're in agreement.
Jason Jacobs: ... speaking out loud here, but it's, yeah.
Scott Clavenna: No, no, we're in agreement. I just, I guess, I'm becoming more sensitive to, this isn't either or, but that if we're going to lean so hard into tech, there has to be like that acknowledgement that policy doesn't happen on its own. Policy doesn't, isn't just for politicians and it's happening over here and you vote once a year and that's all that, that's all that matters. Like policy is a big, big problem and has huge impacts. And it's very beneficial to the tech companies too. It creates markets for them, it creates opportunities. So, I just have the sense that we are at a scale of a problem that tech on its own takes time, and this market is resistant to... You know, in many cases it's more resistant to change than the markets I've been involved in in the past in telecom and it, and the like. And so, you kind of need policy to force that change more than you do in telecom when, you know, the notion that you could have on demand TV was so attractive that there was just a mad rush to enable it because they knew the consumer willingness to pay for it and adopt it quickly.
And everything was out there and it was true. Well, that's not exactly the same here. I feel like a lot of these things, consumers don't have any influence over, whether their concrete is green or steel or whether all of their city is green, not just the parts where the, the wealthier people live. Like lot of this is kind of off stage, and so it needs... I think it's more reliant on policy to solve in a ridiculously short amount of time. We should be terrified about the amount of time we have. If it weren't for climate change, if we were just solving to make things more efficient or whatever, then you could not to go too far on this, but like, literally, like if we had time... Like no one cared in telecom if Netflix was going to happen in 2002 or 2012.
There was no impact on society one way or the other, but here, the difference between an effective deployment of clean energy in 2030 versus 2050 has like profound implications for the entire planet. So you can't... I get frustrated with the notion that markets, that tech and markets are the exclusively, or, or like a way to rely on solving the problem because they just take time.
Jason Jacobs: So let's talk about that policy side then. I mean, you keep... I feel like the, the message I'm hearing is we need policy, policy, policy, policy, policy. So like what, federal policy? State policy? What kind of policy? Like, what is it that... is it one thing? Is it a hundred things like it? Yeah.
Scott Clavenna: No, God knows, oh. Yeah, I just feel like we need to be more accommodating of the concept of actual mandates. There's a real allergy to mandates in the US. It's even hard to get building codes changed here. No one likes to be told what to do just culturally here, and I feel like we're at the point where that... and that addresses NIMBYs of anything, like, I know you like that view, but if we don't do this, we, we've got to have that transmission line. We've got to have those offshore wind turbines. We've got to have this. There's really like not an alternative other than the alternative of 30 foot sea level rise and unlivable southern.
Jason Jacobs: But you just said in the US, we're allergic to it. And so, I get that that's what we need. But from an intellectually honest standpoint, like walk me through the path of how that actually comes about?
Scott Clavenna: Oh, God, I wish I knew. I wish I knew. Well, maybe that's a good pivot to the thing that I'm working on next is a media company that is audio only. We will just going to produce podcasts and those podcasts are broader than our mission was at GTM. So they're not... The podcasts aren't going to be just for energy tech professionals. We're going to try and have a, a broader array of podcasts that reach more people that are climate curious. Yeah, however you, however we want to describe the listener to podcasts that are engaged with the idea, but literally just aren't exposed to all the knowledge out there. So food and home retrofits and yeah, all the little corners of the economy. I think part of what excites me now is storytelling as a way to get sort of climate emergency consciousness out there without like a lot of fear, without a lot of... because I think that's being told quite a bit about how dire the situation is.
So, I'm, I'm really interested in audio as a way to communicate to the, the largest amount of people with a way that audio works around just really engaging people in a way that can be quite deep and quite like emotional. And I think there's an actual connection between that and policy because the more people that feel a relationship to the challenge of climate change and also the solutions and you know, their own personal part, but also like how policy is critical to that, the more that that's out there, the better sort of army of citizens we have to push policy. So I'm much more heading in that direction now than doing like another GTM or industry research kind of thing.
Jason Jacobs: So is this... this is like a, like an ad supported or sponsorship driven network of podcasts?
Scott Clavenna: Yeah. Yeah. So it's Stephen Lacey and I. So it's the, you know, the Energy Gang and the Interchange. So he's, he's company postscript media, we're kind of reforming it, relaunching it as one that's not just a podcast services company to clients, but now we're going to start producing our own original podcasts, with that thesis in mind, that there's a much bigger opportunity to have audio programs that are not just for our industry, but for everybody in the way that, you know, Planet Money shows you different corners of the economy and kind of the, the way the economy works. We wanted to have that thesis around climate change, the intersection between how climate change impacts everything you do, the food you eat, where you drive, where you live, you know, how the culture is unfolding, that kind of thing.
Jason Jacobs: And how far along are you with this? I mean, are you in development? You have as the first slate of shows picked, do you have a team around the table? Have you raised money?
Scott Clavenna: Great question. You're the first person I talked to about publicly. So we are.
Jason Jacobs: I'm honored.
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, yeah. Right on. Well, so we are in the works. The slate is in the works. There's the shows, you know, Energy Gang and Interchange. There's one that... no, there's two with Columbia University, the Energy Exchange, and then on, I wanted just came out this week.
Jason Jacobs: Um, I saw, um, um, Melissa Lott is-
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, yeah.
Jason Jacobs: ... has a show, is that one of yours?
Scott Clavenna: The Big Switch, yes. It's one of ours.
Jason Jacobs: All right, she was a guest on our show. She's terrific.
Scott Clavenna: She's awesome. Yeah. Yeah. No, we're really looking forward to... We've got a, a season out with her now and we're looking forward to keep working with her. She's great. And A Matter of Degrees, that's another one that we had a season of last year, and now we've got another one in the works for this fall. And then some other TBD ones for later this year or next year that are on the themes that I was mentioning.
Jason Jacobs: Uh-huh [affirmative], and this is all s-sponsor-driven or what's the business model?
Scott Clavenna: Yeah. We're still doing some client services work where some of our clients, you know, pay us to produce podcasts. So there's revenue from that, but then like the, you know, the audio companies out there, ultimately you gotta, you know, build an audience and there's an ad supported model to it. There's a lot of cool ancillary ways to monetize podcasts now but, you know, fundamentally, you, you either have advertising, subscriptions, live events, that kind of thing. But ad, you know, sponsorship support is the, is pretty key to it.
Jason Jacobs: I've been wondering about this because I mean, MCJ is not a media company, but I mean, we have this kind of media arm-
Scott Clavenna: Yeah.
Jason Jacobs: ... and we really don't take sponsorships now. We, we did like one or two of them early and and just k-kind of decided it wasn't for us. But one of the things we wrestle with is if we have sponsors as the table, then in a way, it's like having a boss. I mean, how much does that limit your ability to really speak candidly on a certain topic?
Scott Clavenna: That's a great question. We face that at Greentech Media too, that... I mean, that was an ad supported news site. At least that side of our business was, and the conferences business had sponsors. And it's kind of a, an ongoing dialogue you have with them and you do have to stay on top of it all the time. It's easy to relax and slip into either allowing not necessarily editorial control, but, but understanding that, that these sponsors have sensitivities, it's... So, you have to stay very vigilant about that. And what I learned, even before I started Greentech Media, what I learned in the tech market is that we found that even the more aggressive we got about calling companies out for, you know, exaggerated claims or things like that, the more successful we were with advertising.
Because I think in a way, if you're considered a really rigorous challenging media company, the advertisers actually appreciate being aligned with that because the respect that comes with it. So we didn't find it hampered our ability to be editorially aggressive. So we're going in with that same mindset here.
Jason Jacobs: And when you're out telling these stories, how do you think about the balance between making sure people have the right amount of urgency, but also making sure that they're not so much in despair that they-
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, absolutely.
Jason Jacobs: ... they wonder what the point is to even try.
Scott Clavenna: Right. I think that's actually how we're going to measure success, largely is, uh, we really don't want to be a dire climate emergency hair-on-fire audio storytelling, because there is a lot of that out there and it's important stuff. I mean, certain amount of people get engaged with the struggle through fear and that's okay, but that, the there's a limited number of people that that can be the sole way that they get engaged. So I think for the, the rest of the potential audiences and the minds, you want to, you know, expose to these ideas and issues. That's why we're thinking about types of shows that just illuminate where all the areas in your daily life, that either there are innovations going on that will improve those, the, you know, decarbonize, the, the supply chain of it, or even just choices that you're making that are easy choices for you.
It's not like a difficult choice to, you know, how you, if you're retrofitting your house to, you know, here's why heat pumps are okay. Or if you're at the grocery store, here is sustainable foods in Arizona. There's lots of ways to talk about this, that isn't driven by shame, fear, despair, all that, but that we can all be really active participants in this without living off grid in a year and hoped, yeah, just going in a cave.
So, I'm excited about it, and that's definitely the kind of stuff we're thinking about because those... I, I think that's a really effective way to bring people along in this journey because I think despair actually undermines policy moves. So we, there's no way we want to go down that road. I mean, my notion is you don't get involved in policy unless you have a certain optimism that it will make a difference, and that, that kind of activity has a positive outcome.
Jason Jacobs: And you mentioned that for a while, you were anti-capitalism. As you set out on, on this journey, how much is driven by impact, how much is driven by the scope of the opportunity and how do you think about the interrelationship between those two?
Scott Clavenna: Yeah, that's a good question. And I, I'm definitely thinking about that all the time. I wouldn't say I went out in the desert and came back with a, a very clear resolution on that, but I do think, I guess, some lessons learned from GTM is there are more humane ways to build and run a company. You know, companies aren't... there are decisions the CEO makes all the time, little and big about how to compensate people, how to give them opportunity, how to share the equity of the company with the employees, how to make decisions about, like I said, the companies you work with or the advertiser you have, or...
So there's a lot of that, that I learned from GTM that I want to do more of, and, and certainly things that we didn't do that I definitely want to do and be involved in more now is, and certainly in the last year or so, where we... Now, this has become more and more clear is that we didn't quite do enough on the diversity side in the company that you...
It's easy to in a startup to just think I've got to hire the next person, I've got to... you know, we need to add someone to this team and you just, you know, you get some resumes and, you know, this person looks a lot like another person who is successful in this company. So you, you immediately have this bias toward, oh yeah, that person was successful, let's get more of them. And you start perpetuating a certain kind of bias and profile on your company. And I really want to be very intentional about that this time around. And I want the, you know, the shows to reflect that too. I think this climate problem is for all of us and too many people, uh, have been at the receiving end of the, the negative impacts of it. And we need to tell that story and it, it has to be reflected in the company too.
Jason Jacobs: So does this company have a name?
Scott Clavenna: It is still called Post Script Audio. So Stephen Lacey's company now, you don't hear that name very often because it's, you mostly, you hear about it through the, the podcast, but now we're just reincorporated as, uh, a company that can take on outside investment and have stock and all that good stuff.
Jason Jacobs: And are you... Will this be your full-time pursuit?
Scott Clavenna: Yeah. Yeah, for sure.
Jason Jacobs: Nice. And if anyone listening is intrigued about what you're doing, where do you need help and what kinds of people do you want to hear from?
Scott Clavenna: Thank you. I appreciate that. We are looking for... I would say actually the key thing, we're looking for people who are hosts, you know, that could be a good host of a podcast, that have a great idea, and, you know, they could bring that to us that, hey, I know a ton about aquaculture and there could be a great show about sustainable fisheries and, you know, the off the east coast. Like that kind of thing would be great, because I think, one of the things we've learned is there are great intelligent people that can be very deep subject matter experts, but they just don't make great podcasts. So, because podcast is a, you know, a bit of a rarefied art. So we, yeah, we're, every podcast just kind of be is out looking for great talent.
And then behind the scenes, we'll definitely be adding more producers. So anyone who's got talent and audio with as a background we're looking for. And then like growth marketing, because when you get into... I think that's a new country for us, is that coming out of B2B, getting into a little more B2C, that's a new discipline for, for me and Steven. So we're going to need some growth marketing experts, how to, you know, evangelize these podcasts outside the industry verticals we're in now into the broader audience.
Jason Jacobs: Great. And anything I didn't ask you that I should have, or any parting words for listeners?
Scott Clavenna: Well, let's see. Well, we covered a lot. That was good. I guess I'm less anticapitalist than I was, but I, I think I found like a nice, happy medium. So I'm, I'm hopeful that with each, you know, company I'm involved in, you, you'll, you'll be able to see some progress on finding that balance. And, you know, I just want to recreate some of that magic we had a GTM where people really loved working there and you get to see them go on to do great things as they leave the company, and that was definitely the most satisfying thing for me.
Jason Jacobs: Well, this was awesome, Scott. I learned so much, and it's just, also just great to learn more about your personal journey as well. And I'm excited to hear about the new adventure that you and Steven are on as well. It sounds awesome, and please keep me and MCJ posted and let us know if there's ever anything we can do to be helpful. But it seems well timed and, and I agree with you that it does, that just more education and more inspiration and connecting the dots for people and helping them figure out, you know, how their skills can be transferrable and more about how the problem works. And that I think, I think that is really foundational and can lead to a bunch of good things from there.
Scott Clavenna: Absolutely. Yeah, no, I love what you're doing. And you know, actually watching what you've done is, is helped us think about that too, about all the adjacencies out there and actually just get a sense through MCJ, how much passion there is in non-climate focused industries and that, you know, just everyone from the outside, looking in, like, how do I contribute? So that gives us hope that it's a lot of people that want to listen to the podcast too.
Jason Jacobs: Yeah. Well count me as one of them.
Scott Clavenna: Right on.
Jason Jacobs: Okay Scott, thanks again. Best of luck to you and Steven, and can't wait to see where it goes.
Scott Clavenna: Awesome. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Jason Jacobs: Hey everyone, Jason here. Thanks again for joining me on My Climate Journey. If you'd like to learn more about the journey, you can visit us at myclimatejourney.co. Note, that is .co not .com. Some day, we'll get the .com, but right now, .co. You can also find me on Twitter @jjacobs22 where I would encourage you to share your feedback on the episode or suggestions for future guests you'd like to hear. And, before I let you go, if you enjoyed the show, please share an episode with a friend or consider leaving a review on iTunes. The lawyers made me say that. Thank you.
