> Failure to pick problems that are relevant for both will result in increased decision making complexity at all levels of the organisation: do we optimise for impact (the environmental problem) or for revenue (the customer’s problem)?
I've been an climate tech entrepreneur for the past 7+ years, and the most reliable way I've found to accomplish the combo viable-business + climate-impact:
1. Get a job at a revenue generating climate-change-fighting company (solar, EVs, policy/regulatory consulting, etc.).
2. Keep your eyes open for pain points that your company (or especially you in your position) would pay money to solve.
3. Quit and start a company solving that pain point (or if you're not the founder-type, go work for a company trying to solve that pain point).
I suppose this kind of strategy would work in many other industries, but it's especially effective in climate tech, because:
(a) As OP mentions, the pain points are very hidden to the general public, so you really need to be actually working inside the industry to find and understand them (since energy often has very complex business models and regulatory constructs).
(b) By focusing on finding pain points for already climate-change-fighting companies and solving them, your impact goals are already built-in, since you're enabling more impact by default. So you don't have to worry as much about finding the magical combo of viable-business + impact.
(c) The climate-change-fighting sector is so young that many of the pain points are still major issues and don't have many viable solutions yet. In other more mature industries, many pain points already have established companies solving them, so there's less of green field for new companies.
Anyway, for people looking to fight climate change, by far the biggest thing you can do is join the industry and make a career out of it. There's so much ceiling here!
I think thread parents point is that the problems are obtuse and plentiful enough that in order to understand them you need to be involved in point 1, which is arguably the hard part.
I've been an climate tech entrepreneur for the past 7+ years, and the most reliable way I've found to accomplish the combo viable-business + climate-impact:
1. Get a job at a revenue generating climate-change-fighting company (solar, EVs, policy/regulatory consulting, etc.).
2. Keep your eyes open for pain points that your company (or especially you in your position) would pay money to solve.
3. Quit and start a company solving that pain point (or if you're not the founder-type, go work for a company trying to solve that pain point).
I suppose this kind of strategy would work in many other industries, but it's especially effective in climate tech, because:
(a) As OP mentions, the pain points are very hidden to the general public, so you really need to be actually working inside the industry to find and understand them (since energy often has very complex business models and regulatory constructs).
(b) By focusing on finding pain points for already climate-change-fighting companies and solving them, your impact goals are already built-in, since you're enabling more impact by default. So you don't have to worry as much about finding the magical combo of viable-business + impact.
(c) The climate-change-fighting sector is so young that many of the pain points are still major issues and don't have many viable solutions yet. In other more mature industries, many pain points already have established companies solving them, so there's less of green field for new companies.
Anyway, for people looking to fight climate change, by far the biggest thing you can do is join the industry and make a career out of it. There's so much ceiling here!