Sea ChangeTalent PartnersTalent. Advisory. Partnership.

When Los Angeles was awarded the 2028 Olympic Games, the original vision was incredibly ambitious. The city committed to hosting a largely car-free event, aiming to demonstrate how one of the most car-dependent metropolitan areas in the United States could leverage public transit to move millions of global visitors.

The climate sector may have wasted a decade underinvesting in nuclear because it was culturally unpopular, while simultaneously overfunding software layers that could never solve baseload energy constraints alone. For years, nuclear sat outside the acceptable narrative of climate tech. Too expensive. Too political. Too slow. Too risky. Now, many of the same investors and operators who once...

For the last decade, distributed energy resources (DERs) were positioned as one of the most important disruptors in the energy transition. And in many ways, they were. They challenged centralized models.They introduced flexibility at the edge.They forced the industry to rethink how energy could be generated, stored, and consumed. That disruption mattered. It still does. But we are now on the...

Over the last fifteen years, I have watched climate tech move through multiple cycles of optimism, overcorrection, and recalibration. Each wave brought new capital, new founders, and new narratives about what would scale fastest. For a long time, software was the answer. It was capital efficient, scalable, and aligned with venture expectations. That is no longer true in the same way. The next...

The narrative around an EV slowdown is gaining traction. My view is that it is being misinterpreted.

What we are seeing is not a failure of electrification. It is a correction in how and when the market scales. Demand that was pulled forward by policy is now normalizing. That is not a sign of weakness. It is what real markets do.

At the same time, the fundamentals continue to strengthen. Battery costs are declining. Charging infrastructure is expanding. Vehicle quality and range continue to improve. These are the signals that matter.

The bigger issue is not adoption. It is execution.

Over the past 15 years working across the energy and climate sector, I have seen this pattern repeatedly. The industry tends to over-index on future-state solutions while underutilizing what is already deployable today.

That dynamic is playing out clearly in how EVs are being integrated into the grid.

I recently conducted a Q&A with Max Parness, Director of Grid Services at Toyota North America. The perspectives shared are his own and do not represent his employer. Our conversation reinforced a key point. EVs are already one of the most scalable distributed energy resources available. The industry is not treating them that way.

---

Kelly: My perspective is that EV adoption was pulled forward artificially by policy and is now normalizing. Are we truly seeing a slowdown, or just a correction?

Max: I think the tens of billions of dollars in write-downs are a clear signal that OEMs got ahead of customer demand. Adoption was driven more by policy than by customers. When those policies were reduced, demand softened. That looks like a correction, not a failure. At the same time, battery costs continue to decline and charging networks are expanding. The long-term trend remains intact.

---

Kelly: The industry seems to be over-indexing on long-term solutions like vehicle-to-grid. Why are we not scaling managed charging today when the technology already exists?

Max: From my perspective, managed charging is the most immediate opportunity. Millions of EVs can already adjust when they charge. If those vehicles are coordinated with grid needs, it can improve utilization, lower costs for customers, integrate more renewable electricity, and reduce strain on aging infrastructure. This can be done today with existing software and assets already on the road.

Yet adoption remains limited.

---

Kelly: One of the biggest challenges I’m seeing is that enrollment, not technology, is the real bottleneck. What does it really take to get customers to participate at scale?

Max: What stands out to me is that customers need simplicity and trust. They want to understand the value quickly, enroll easily, and see consistent savings. Companies with strong consumer brands, such as automakers, can play a key role role by embedding these programs into platforms customers already use, which reduces friction and customer acquisition costs. Without scale, the economics do not work. With scale, the benefits extend to the entire grid.

---

Kelly: From what I’m seeing, EVs are already the largest distributed energy resource we have. Why is the grid not treating them that way?

Max: My sense is that the opportunity is there, but the industry is still organized in silos. Electricity, mobility, and infrastructure are converging, but the talent and systems supporting them are not yet aligned. The next phase depends on people and organizations that can operate across those boundaries.

The opportunity is not theoretical – it exists today. The challenge is execution.

The companies that get this right will not be the ones with the most advanced technology. They will be the ones that can execute at scale.

Kelly: That shift will not be driven by new infrastructure alone. It will be driven by teams that can operate across electricity, mobility, and data, and turn what already exists into something that works in practice.

#EnergyTransition #Electrification #EVs #Grid #ClimateTech #DistributedEnergy #VPP #ManagedCharging #ACTexpo

The narrative around EVs right now is noisy. Depending on who you ask, the market is either collapsing or accelerating. The truth sits somewhere in between. EVs are not disappearing. But the market is going through a reset. From 2020 through 2024, growth was driven by incentives, capital availability, and aggressive OEM expansion. In 2025 and into 2026, we are seeing a correction. U.S. EV sales...

There is a growing gap between hiring demand, data center expertise, and the speed at which renewable and energy infrastructure needs to scale. We’re not just talking about scaling solar or wind anymore. The conversation has moved upstream to power, grid access, and infrastructure capacity itself. As highlighted in this Axios coverage on data center investment rivaling energy sectors, capital...

Tariffs can significantly affect climate tech infrastructure buildout—positively or negatively—depending on where they fall and how companies respond. Here’s a breakdown of the impact: Negative Impacts Increased Equipment Costs Tariffs on imported solar panels, batteries, inverters, or EV components (e.g., from China) can raise project costs by 10–30%, affecting solar, storage, and...

The State of Climate Tech Candidate Risk Tolerance, Compensation Priorities, and New Opportunity Considerations Key Takeaways As climate technologies have become more mainstream, much of the recruiting industry has turned its attention to figuring out how to attract top talent into the climate market. While we recognize the value in these efforts, we believe startups need data-driven insights...

Originally published in PowerMag.com.

Anyone who’s ever made hiring decisions knows the real danger of hiring the wrong person. By some estimates, an unsuitable employee can cost a company as much as $240,000, not to mention the collateral damage inflicted on company morale and reduced productivity and achievement.

In a world where every decision impacts the bottom line and the meeting of key milestones to unlock further funding, the execution risk of hiring mistakes can be a death blow for a growing startup or new corporate division.

In the climate tech sector, a wrong hire not only slows down a company’s sales but also wastes valuable financial resources towards the cause of slowing down the climate crisis and ensuring all of us a liveable planet. You can’t #deploydeploydeploy, as Jigar Shah says when you are constantly hiring and training new replacements because you’re basing your hiring decisions on a hunch. This industry needs risk management data to inform hiring decisions specifically.

COMMENTARY

It’s common to hear investors, startup CEOs, and corporate leaders analyze and strategize around their competitive landscape, technology weaknesses, ability to scale, market timing and other factors that could hinder their success. Yet, the concept that the people behind all of these activities could be the thing that makes or breaks a company’s trajectory is often overlooked or undervalued.

Yet a significant amount of funding entering the climate tech and mobility space, even as broader markets soften, creates enormous competition for the best talent to move the industry forward. Because the stakes are much higher, we are now witnessing a more intense focus on talent risk management. Indeed, McKinsey notes that a leadership track record and the ability to attract talent is one of four dealmakers or deal breakers in climate investing.

The Data Gap

While the HR sector offers multiple management tools, current programs only focus on reducing risk on the “buy side” post-hire. For example, existing enterprise software solutions can track diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) metrics to meet new requirements to disclose “human capital resources.” The solutions can also be used alongside staff surveys to gather employee feedback and score their moods, a top indicator of workforce retention that can help reduce attrition risk.

While these tools can certainly help organizations identify and remedy potential problems before they impact a company’s reputation or financial performance, businesses still face massive risks on the “supply side” regarding talent acquisition and its impact on company growth. The data that does exist is rare or locked up in the minds of experts.

Not only are current enterprise HR tools built for large, established corporations—rather than climate tech companies, which tend to be smaller or emerging businesses—but they also lack data that can provide transparency into the candidate marketplace. While some companies have explored AI or options developed in-house, real-time information on supply-side aspects such as talent pool competition and candidate psychology, availability, and compensation rates do not exist.

When hiring for new sustainability or renewable energy divisions, even larger companies often have no idea who they need to hire, how the new hire will fit into their existing organizational chart and reporting structure, or even what the job description should say.

When understanding the talent market for climate tech, C-suite leaders and their investors are often walking in the dark with a flashlight that’s losing its battery. Additional tools are needed to fill the gap and reduce talent acquisition risk in order for the organization to grow and meet stakeholder and climate change targets.

As with all things concerning supply and demand, without data, you can’t properly “price your product,” or in this case, create competitive offers to win the A-Players you want. Companies lack the information needed to make talent maps based on appropriate market timing for company growth that align with investor or executive expectations. Such talent maps will help you build into your forecasts how long it will take to get a person in and up to speed. Additionally, such mapping will help you create timelines for company milestones you may have promised your investors.

Take the real estate market, for example. Suppose you’re thinking about selling your house. In that case, you’d likely turn to your realtor to give you the market data on the number of homes for sale in your area, how long your house is likely to stay on the market, and the selling prices of similar homes. Known as “comps,” this data informs sellers of whether there is a market scarcity or oversupply.

You can think of the market for talent in the same way. Investors, executives, and managers need data to provide visibility as part of their risk assessment, and companies must understand the market dynamics to make smart hires. Without this information, both investors and businesses are open to significant execution risk.

Hiring without supply-side data or a proper strategy can result in wasted time, money and lost business opportunities. Risks begin with employees and roll downstream to significantly impact the company overall.

While companies often try to triage hiring issues, the cost of today’s capital has decreased investor tolerances for hiring contractors or other quick fixes. That’s why a flying-blind approach could potentially make your next funding round more expensive—or you may lose it altogether.

Reducing Talent Acquisition Risk in Climate Tech

While capital for the energy transition and carbon reduction isn’t completely drying up, investors are far savvier and senior leadership teams are vetting candidates more closely. It’s become a seller’s market.

With talent likely to become one of the most critical factors in organizational success, leaders must do everything they can to understand their company’s needs and then compete for that critical talent. In the vacuum of accessible data, there are a few things companies can do to better inform their hiring decisions.

Look for Patterns in Your Best Hires: With each new successful hire, take the time to look back on what worked and on poor hiring decisions for what didn’t. Evaluate the sourcing of applicants, how they were interviewed, and what the salary negotiation process was to reveal some best practices you can use for future hiring.

Chat Up Your Peers: In the absence of available data, it’s critical for C-Suite leaders and HR managers to network with their peers at other companies and discuss their hiring experiences. Whether over a cup of coffee (virtually or in person) or at a conference, people are often happy to offer advice to those they see as non-competitive. If you notice a particular company succeeding on the hiring front, take the opportunity to ask them for their advice. You might be surprised at the nuggets of knowledge you receive.

Leverage an Expert: Some teams do nothing else but talk to candidates and evaluate market dynamics. These recruiting teams speak with candidates daily on the front lines of hiring decisions within their industry domains. These teams often have real-time information on which professionals are restless for a change, current trends in compensation packages, and other market dynamics.

As the climate tech market continues to grow and mature, we can expect the development of supply-side tools to help with talent acquisition. Such software could deliver instantaneous market data on potential candidates, including availability and compensation for more strategic hiring. This improved market transparency could also provide value for additional executive functions, including legal, finance and operations. Over time, using such tools could reduce the talent risk and, by extension, execution risk for startups and corporate divisions.

Technology alone isn’t going to prevent climate change; it’s the people building, commercializing and deploying that technology who will.

—Paige Carratturo is the co-founder and CEO of Sea Change, a talent venture firm that provides advisory, business intelligence and retained search services to climate tech investors and their portfolio companies, as well as some of the largest global corporations that are transforming their executive teams in order to meet the complex demands of moving to a more sustainable and climate-focused operating model.  At Sea Change Advisors, she drives thought leadership and leads advisory services and C-level recruiting. Paige co-founded Sea Change as an evolution of the Enertech Search Partners brand, which was founded in 2009. Paige is a thought leader and frequent speaker about topics related to talent strategy, leadership development, acquisition, and retention.