If you mean start-ups plugged into conventional VC funding, I'd say no.
VCs require companies they control to either achieve world domination or be bought out by a monopolist who already dominates the world. They are not satisfied with lifestyle businesses that have found a niche and are indefinitely sustainable, they demand maximum growth.
We can't keep pushing infinite growth on a finite planet, but that's exactly what venture capital does. We need degrowth instead.
Reason being: the word "startup" started to mean a bait-and-switch where a company is founded claiming to be focusing on something only to be eventually sold for a lot of money; the eventual sale is *the goal* of the company being founded. In other words, the real product *is* the company.
There are exceptions — @smari 's Ecosophy is one, I believe.
If the word "startup" were to mean just "young companies", then I would be more on the "qualified yes" side.
"can" is too vague. There are opportunities available to start-ups in terms of a fairly clean starting point, but it's obviously debatable as to whether that potential is outweighed by pressure to establish a market, move towards a revenue stream and everything else. Are there any examples of startups with a strong environmental culture that is formally retained in the case of a buy-out?
The start-up I work for has installed vision systems in brick and tile factories and reinforcement-learning control systems for filling machines in packing factories that significantly decrease the amount of waste produced (and in the case of the brick/tile factories result in a significant reduction in wasted CO2 by catching defective products before they spend days in kilns at around 600°C)
#Capitalism will never solve #ClimateChange. Doing so would be putting something other than profit ahead of the primary drive, which is an antithesis to capitalism.
very interested in people who said "qualified yes". I think that startups help fight climate change in a similar way individuals help fighting climate change, which is like... Common decency.
I think I disagree with the overall sentiment of most replies here. Whilst capitalism is the fundamental driver of the climate crisis, I think that an institution that operates with the laws of capitalism *can* do good. If a start-up allows an individual to spend their career working on climate mitigation, policy, or something similar, then that may well be a better use of said individuals time otherwise.
We can list the world's top 80% polluters and directly hold them accountable. No need to invent a new messianic startup for this, or squeeze that flimsy long tail of the 20% just yet.
For example: several friends are currently sitting in unheated homes in the UK. What an incredible market opportunity for startups commercializing "zero-energy" homes.
I think they can be a piece of the puzzle, qualified yes for a lot of the reasons already enumerated. For instance, I have a friend that is a chemist for Blue Planet Systems who have developed a process to make the creation of concrete carbon-negative. If they manage to get widespread adoption, it could lead to billions of tons of CO2 sequestered annually.
Of course keeping in mind, "there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism" 😀
I suppose you could raise a ton of VC money and use it to buy congress 🤔 but wait wouldn't that mean the VCs would own congress then that might backfire
Startups that try to fix everything themselves, such as carbon capture and solar geo-engineering, will probably cause more harm than good.
But startups that work on reducing emissions in areas like fleet management, industrial processes, energy efficiency, battery technology, public transportation, remote work and remote learning can be a big part of the Transition.
I'm especially interested in rail transport modernisation.
- Qualified no for me. IMHO, 2 main problems here: 1 - "startup", means investments and VCs (who forgot some time ago what due diligence are), TAM etc. Not sure there's enough "intelligence" and will to go this route, if money doesn't follow 2 - besides SaaS "solutions", there's no real interest in hard problems solving (yet?): e.g. battery/mineral recycling
Remote work/learning "startups" are exploding everywhere like mushrooms, with various quality levels, and associated risks...
Living in West Africa, been following the "startup" space on the continent for quite some time. What you described as examples could be of huge interest here (to avoid burning oil), but except a few supply chain projects, there's no interest except for Fintech.
So far, re:EV batteries, countries prefer extracting new minerals from the ground, than thinking of creating a sustainable recycling chain. Been there a few months ago...
- While there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, startups and folks can change consumer and industrial habits for the better. - Sometimes a small change, over time, can create a sustained and substantial results. - What is a startup, anyway? It isn't just in tech. It's in non-profits, government departments and elsewhere. The mentality of tiger teams and small working groups can be powerful for new ideas, imho.
Mech Mouse
•The "Buck" starts and ends with them
It's A Me, Bori'O
•Whatever good a small companies can accomplish will not have any significant effect faced against the massive polluters out there.
Nelson Chu Pavlosky
•VCs require companies they control to either achieve world domination or be bought out by a monopolist who already dominates the world. They are not satisfied with lifestyle businesses that have found a niche and are indefinitely sustainable, they demand maximum growth.
We can't keep pushing infinite growth on a finite planet, but that's exactly what venture capital does. We need degrowth instead.
Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦
•Reason being: the word "startup" started to mean a bait-and-switch where a company is founded claiming to be focusing on something only to be eventually sold for a lot of money; the eventual sale is *the goal* of the company being founded. In other words, the real product *is* the company.
There are exceptions — @smari 's Ecosophy is one, I believe.
If the word "startup" were to mean just "young companies", then I would be more on the "qualified yes" side.
scribe ✒️
•Mike Sheldon
•Evan Prodromou
•Fabián Rodríguez 🛡💾 🇨🇴 🌴
•Ubergeek
•Jons Mostovojs
•Dr. Cameron Underwood
•last senpai
•We can list the world's top 80% polluters and directly hold them accountable. No need to invent a new messianic startup for this, or squeeze that flimsy long tail of the 20% just yet.
Johannes Ernst
•Steve Scotten
•Eliot Lash
•Of course keeping in mind, "there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism" 😀
aeva
•Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
•Waiting for startups with new technologies is a nice excuse for existing industries that don't want to change.
Evan Prodromou
•I'm a qualified yes.
Startups that try to fix everything themselves, such as carbon capture and solar geo-engineering, will probably cause more harm than good.
But startups that work on reducing emissions in areas like fleet management, industrial processes, energy efficiency, battery technology, public transportation, remote work and remote learning can be a big part of the Transition.
I'm especially interested in rail transport modernisation.
Jons Mostovojs
•DJM 🇧🇯 🚀 🐯
•1 - "startup", means investments and VCs (who forgot some time ago what due diligence are), TAM etc. Not sure there's enough "intelligence" and will to go this route, if money doesn't follow
2 - besides SaaS "solutions", there's no real interest in hard problems solving (yet?): e.g. battery/mineral recycling
Remote work/learning "startups" are exploding everywhere like mushrooms, with various quality levels, and associated risks...
DJM 🇧🇯 🚀 🐯
•So far, re:EV batteries, countries prefer extracting new minerals from the ground, than thinking of creating a sustainable recycling chain. Been there a few months ago...
Vincent St. Pierre :mw:
•- While there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, startups and folks can change consumer and industrial habits for the better.
- Sometimes a small change, over time, can create a sustained and substantial results.
- What is a startup, anyway? It isn't just in tech. It's in non-profits, government departments and elsewhere. The mentality of tiger teams and small working groups can be powerful for new ideas, imho.
And that can change the world.