New Wave.

Why ten-year funds don’t fit the companies climate needs, and what a venture fund looks like when no one gets paid unless LPs get liquidity.We’re joined by Guillaume Bregeras, co-managing director at 2050, a €200M investment platform rethinking how venture capital works. Before that, he spent 25 years as a journalist, covering tech for Les Echos from 2014.That distance gave him a clear view of the industry. Venture capital was a precise answer to a precise problem at a specific moment in time. It was never meant to apply to everything, or to last forever.Yet most funds still run on the same clock: raise the money, deploy it, give it back within ten years. In practice, European funds take around 17 years, and many end up extending their life because there aren’t enough exits.That clock works for software. It doesn’t work for companies building new cement, batteries or seaweed farms.2050, founded by Marie Ekeland, the seed investor behind Criteo and the founder of Daphni, is built to hold companies for as long as they need. No fixed fund life, no carry, and a management company nobody can take dividends out of.As Guillaume puts it, venture has become “the less innovative industry when you finance the most innovative people and technologies.”In our conversation, we covered:→ What 25 years of journalism taught him about venture, and why Europe copied the Silicon Valley model without adapting it→ Why Europe still lacks exits, and why waiting for European corporates to buy startups won’t work→ Why he wanted to scrap the word “impact” as early as 2015→ How Marie Ekeland went from seeding Criteo and building France Digitale and Daphni to starting 2050→ Why 95% of venture money went to SaaS, and why companies like Paebbl, Tesla and Verkor need more time→ How an evergreen fund works: entering at a quarterly NAV, reselling after five years, and a liquidity pocket of 5% of NAV a year→ Why new LPs get exposure to the whole portfolio instead of a weaker later vintage→ How 2050 values private companies conservatively, down to the state of the team→ What “commons” are: non-return investments like a climate course at Paris Dauphine and a platform bringing traditional investors into the blue economy→ How a yearly bonus replaces carry, why it only unlocks with growth, liquidity and impact KPIs, and why half of it goes back to the commons→ Why carry and management-company dividends lock young talent out of VC partnerships→ Where an existing fund manager should start if they want to change their model→ What Stripe’s founders told him about not wanting to IPO, and why secondaries keep growing→ Why venture won’t look the same in 10–20 years, in a world of polycrisisUnderneath it all is one idea: align the interests of LPs, founders, the team and the wider ecosystem, and give companies the time they need.As Guillaume says, “time is your ally.”****Reach out to Guillaume Bregeras:Guillaume Bregeras → Guillaume Bregeras on LinkedIn2050 → 2050.do****Leave a review: Apple Podcasts // Spotify****Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****🌊 What Happens When an Exited Founder Bets His Own Money on ClimateWhy one exited founder put his own money into 45 climate startups, and why he backs the technology before the founder.We’re joined by Pjotr van Schothorst, a climate tech angel investor at PVS Investments who has made 45 startup investments since 2019, all with his own money.He grew up in the Netherlands during the 1970s oil crisis, playing football on the highway on car-free Sundays. The lesson stuck: oil and gas would run out one day, and the world would need something else.He studied physics to work on fusion, realised it would take too long, and joined Shell instead. Twelve years later he left to build 3D graphics software. The dividends from that business, and later its exit, now fund his startup investments.Today he works full time as what he calls a one-person VC, using AI for the analysis and due diligence a fund would hire people to do.And he holds a view many investors won’t share: the founder matters, but in deep tech the technology matters more. As Pjotr puts it, “sometimes you can even change out founders.”In our conversation, we covered:→ How an oil crisis, a physics degree and 12 years at Shell led to a career in 3D graphics software→ Why Shell wouldn’t give him shares in the spin-out, and why he walked away with 100% ownership instead→ Why his first startup never found product-market fit, while an architecture software product became profitable enough to pay out dividends→ How he allocates his wealth: a third of his 2024 exit set aside for about eight €100K investments a year, for ten years→ Why climate investing only creates impact when it makes economic sense for the customer→ Why he backs hard-to-decarbonise sectors like shipping and aviation, including three fusion startups→ What six bankruptcies out of 45 investments, and six battery bets that haven’t scaled yet, taught him about diversification→ Why he moved from investing close to home in the Netherlands to looking for the best technology worldwide→ Why he puts the technology ahead of the founder→ What an angel can bring beyond the check: technical judgment, pattern recognition, and bridge rounds before a Series A→ Why he never votes against founders and doesn’t take board seats→ How to get more exited entrepreneurs to put money into climate, directly or through fundsHis advice to exited founders isn’t to copy him. If you’re not comfortable picking deals one by one, put your money in a VC or a fund of funds and let the experts do the work.But put some of it into climate. As Pjotr asks: “Why would you invest in things that do not matter to the world and to yourself?”📬 Reach out to Pjotr van Schothorst:Pjotr van Schothorst → Pjotr van Schothorst on LinkedInPVS Investments → pvs-investments.com✨ Leave a review: Apple Podcasts // Spotify This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

We’re joined by Gabriel Scheer, who leads energy, built environment, transport and water investments at Elemental Impact. Before that, he was on the founding team at Lime, one of the few billion-dollar companies to come out of climate tech.Elemental is an unusual investor. It’s a nonprofit. Instead of LPs expecting a financial return, it raises philanthropic and corporate capital, invests it, and recycles any exit proceeds into the next company. Around 165 companies in 16–17 years.That structure lets it play where venture often struggles.A startup has built the thing once. Later-stage capital wants to see it built five more times, in different places and conditions. In between sits a gap that is hard to fund, and that is exactly where first-of-a-kind climate hardware gets stuck.We recorded this one in a restaurant at Hello Tomorrow in Amsterdam, and covered a lot of ground: from convincing cities to let Lime onto their streets, to a new financing instrument, to getting Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon to learn from the same pilots.In our conversation, we covered:→ What operating at Lime teaches you that investors underestimate, and why culture mattered so much in a company scaling into new cities fast→ Why Lime was as much B2G as B2C: if a city wasn’t happy, there was no business→ Why policy may be one of climate’s biggest levers, and why you probably shouldn’t build a company on policy alone→ How US climate policy has whiplashed, and why state and local policies keep moving anyway→ How Elemental works: a nonprofit, evergreen model with a strategy track ($250–500k plus coaching) and a project track for first-of-a-kind deployments→ Whether venture capital is built for climate hardware, from closed-loop geothermal to venture money pouring into nuclear→ Whether Europe and the US can learn to build as fast as China again→ What 165 investments taught Elemental about founder communities and choosing aligned investors→ The deSAFE: a callable SAFE note for early project development, and how Fervo and Nitricity used it→ The Data Center Innovation Initiative: one pot of capital, one set of pilots, and shared results across four hyperscalers→ Which technologies the hyperscalers want: green cement, long-duration storage, cooling, materials and grid optimisationAsked what he wants listeners to remember, Gabriel’s answer was simple: “It takes a village.”Pick your team and your investors carefully, and find the people who will support you along the way.****Reach out to Gabriel Scheer:Gabriel Scheer → Gabriel Scheer on LinkedInElemental Impact → elementalimpact.com****Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****New Wave is supported by:Evertrace: the leading founder detection engine for VCs. It traces signals across the digital landscape to uncover emerging founders earlier than anyone else, so you meet tomorrow’s founders today.I use it myself to source more deals at Climate Club, and I LOVE it. See what Evertrace can do for you here, or ask me for an intro and get a little something from the team ;) This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****New Wave is supported by:Evertrace: the leading founder detection engine for VCs. It traces signals across the digital landscape to uncover emerging founders earlier than anyone else, so you meet tomorrow’s founders today.I use it myself to source more deals at Climate Club, and I LOVE it. See what Evertrace can do for you here, or ask me for an intro and get a little something from the team ;)****🌊 When Does Fusion Actually Become a Business?Fusion is getting closer to producing net energy. The harder question is whether it can ever produce cheap electricity.We’re joined by Dan Brunner, co-founder and former CTO of Commonwealth Fusion Systems, one of the companies at the forefront of the race to commercial fusion.CFS has raised billions of dollars, signed power agreements with customers including Google, and is building SPARC, its machine designed to demonstrate net fusion energy.But proving fusion works is only one step.As Dan puts it, there’s ultimately another Q that matters: the dollar Q.Can a fusion plant produce more money than it costs to build, operate, maintain, and continuously repair?In this episode, we go from the basic physics of fusion all the way to the economics of a commercial power plant.In our conversation, we covered:→ What Q actually means — scientific Q, engineering Q and ultimately dollar Q→ Why tokamaks may be the first fusion technology to put electricity on the grid→ How high-temperature superconductors changed the economics of fusion→ Why tritium supply and breeding could become a critical constraint→ The overlooked problem of materials being bombarded by fusion neutrons→ Why component lifetime and plant availability may determine whether fusion is economical→ Whether fusion can ever compete with fission on cost→ Why the first customers are likely to be Google, Microsoft and other power-hungry companies→ Where early-stage investors can still play through fusion picks and shovels→ Why SPARC achieving net energy could trigger a new wave of investment into the industry✨ Leave a review: Apple Podcasts // Spotify This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****🌊 Manufacturing in SpaceWhy the next generation of advanced materials might be made 500 km above Earth.We’re joined by Josh Western, co-founder and CEO of Space Forge, a UK company building spacecraft to manufacture advanced materials in space — and bring them back to Earth.The idea sounds almost absurd at first.Why launch something into orbit just to manufacture a few grams of material?Because space gives manufacturers something Earth can’t: microgravity, ultra-high vacuum, and extreme temperatures. For certain advanced materials, especially compound semiconductors, those conditions could produce dramatically higher-quality crystals.And Space Forge doesn’t need to manufacture an entire chip in orbit.The company wants to produce the seed crystal in space, return it to Earth, then use conventional semiconductor infrastructure to scale it. Josh says one seed crystal could ultimately support the production of more than one million chips on Earth.In our conversation, we covered:→ Why Earth is actually a difficult place to manufacture ultra-pure materials→ How a few grams produced in space could enable millions of semiconductor chips→ Why Space Forge built both its own semiconductor reactor and reusable spacecraft→ Whether launch costs actually break the economics of in-space manufacturing→ Why regulation and customs may be a bigger bottleneck than technology→ How better semiconductors could reduce energy consumption→ Why Space Forge sees space manufacturing as part of Europe’s reindustrialisation→ What could come after semiconductors: solar cells, metals, graphene and batteriesPerhaps the most interesting idea is that space doesn’t need to replace terrestrial manufacturing. It could simply become another industrial environment, used for the handful of manufacturing steps where Earth’s atmosphere and gravity become constraints.Josh’s ambition is for that idea to eventually become boring.Because by then, manufacturing materials in space would simply be another part of the industrial toolkit.✨ Leave a review: Apple Podcasts // Spotify This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****New Wave is supported by:Evertrace: the leading founder detection engine for VCs. It traces signals across the digital landscape to uncover emerging founders earlier than anyone else, so you meet tomorrow’s founders today.I use it myself to source more deals at Climate Club, and I LOVE it. See what Evertrace can do for you here, or ask me for an intro and get a little something from the team ;)***🌊 Orchestrating the Energy TransitionWhy the biggest opportunity in energy may not be inventing new technology, but making the entire system work better.We’re joined by Julia Padberg, Partner at SET Ventures, one of Europe’s longest-standing specialist energytech investors. SET has been investing in the energy transition since 2007 — long before power became one of venture capital’s hottest markets.In this episode, we unpack what nearly two decades of energy investing teaches you about building enduring venture returns — and why Julia believes the energy transition is increasingly an integration challenge, not a technology challenge.As more investors rush into power, SET is taking a different approach: staying disciplined on valuations, backing companies that own critical customer interfaces, and looking for the orchestrators capable of connecting software, hardware, assets and capital.We also dive into one of the most interesting emerging models in climate venture: blended capital. Companies such as Decade Energy and Enrise can use infrastructure financing for physical assets while venture capital funds the technology and operating company — potentially allowing them to scale physical infrastructure without destroying venture-level returns.In our conversation, we covered:→ How do you build a venture firm that lasts? Why SET’s longevity comes down to specialization, network, discipline and becoming a trusted partner to both founders and LPs.→ Why everyone suddenly wants to invest in power. Energy security, electrification and sustainability are converging — but more capital also means higher valuations and more competition.→ Why SET doesn’t chase the hype. Entry valuation still matters in a European energy market where unicorn exits remain relatively rare.→ The real bottleneck in the energy transition. Julia argues that we already know how to make solar panels, batteries and EVs cheaper. The next challenge is coordinating millions of distributed energy assets.→ Why orchestration could create the biggest companies. The winners may be businesses that combine software, hardware, financing and services into one simple customer proposition.→ Can flexibility markets become overcrowded? Julia explains why the absolute volume of flexibility needed could continue increasing as intermittent renewable generation grows.→ The rise of blended capital models. How venture-backed companies can separate their technology stack from their capital stack using SPVs and infrastructure financing.→ Why infrastructure capital can actually increase venture returns. Rather than forcing VCs to fund batteries, solar or charging infrastructure, asset financing can remove one of the biggest constraints on scaling.→ Where AI fits into energy. From biodiversity monitoring around wind farms to infrastructure operations, Julia sees opportunities for AI to replace expensive legacy systems with cheaper, more intelligent solutions.→ Energy security is becoming an investment category. Cybersecurity, physical infrastructure monitoring and decentralised energy systems are moving higher on the agenda.→ Europe’s fragmentation is both a problem and a moat. Different regulations, grids and market structures make expansion harder — but companies that learn to navigate that complexity can build powerful competitive advantages.→ Why European startups don’t always need to internationalise immediately. In enormous energy markets such as Germany, owning a large portion of the value chain can create very large businesses without expanding into ten countries from day one.And Julia leaves us with three lessons from a decade of investing:1. The energy transition is an integration challenge.System integration and great business models can matter more than another silver-bullet technology.2. Value capture matters as much as value creation.Creating value for the energy system isn’t enough — the best businesses position themselves at critical interfaces where they can actually capture it.3. The best founders make complexity feel simple.Customers don’t want to understand every layer of the energy system. They want a solution that saves money, removes friction and makes saying yes obvious.***✨ Leave a review on Apple Podcast and Spotify to support the show. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****🌊 Financing the Hardware EraWhy climate founders need to stop treating equity as the default way to pay for CapEx.We’re joined by William Godfrey of Tangible, who has spent the past few years developing a thesis around how climate and hardtech founders should combine equity, debt, equipment finance, asset-backed lending, project finance, and other forms of capital.Because one thing is becoming increasingly clear:We’re not going to solve climate change through software alone.Climate companies need factories. Equipment. Batteries. Robots. Infrastructure. Physical assets.And financing all of that with venture equity can become an extraordinarily expensive mistake.In this episode, we go deep on how founders should actually finance capital-intensive growth — and why the best climate companies may increasingly need to become as sophisticated at financial engineering as they are at technical engineering.One framework from William stuck with me:Equity is for uncertainty. Debt is for repeatability.Equity makes sense when you’re funding something that has never been done before: R&D, prototypes, first-of-a-kind technology, new teams and markets.But once you’re repeatedly deploying an asset with increasingly predictable economics, a different pool of capital becomes available.And learning how to access it can fundamentally change the economics of the company. Listen to this episode to learn more or read this guide by Tangible. ✨ Leave a review and share the episode if this conversation challenged the way you think about growth, innovation, and sustainability. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****🌊 Water’s Mispriced OpportunityWhy one of the world’s most essential markets may also be one of venture capital’s most overlooked.Ahead of The Drop in Malmö, we’re joined by Steve Kloos, Partner at Burnt Island Ventures, a venture firm dedicated exclusively to investing in water technologies.Water is foundational to life, and to the economy. Yet despite roughly $1.6 trillion in annual global spending, Steve argues it remains surprisingly underinvested by venture capital.In this episode, we approach water almost like a course: starting with the fundamentals, mapping the biggest problems and technologies, and asking a more provocative question:Could water actually be one of the more compelling venture categories today?Steve’s thesis comes down to a simple dynamic: entry valuations remain relatively reasonable, while the exit market is getting stronger. At the same time, climate change, industrial demand and water scarcity are forcing customers to spend.In our conversation, we covered:→ Why water is becoming impossible to ignore, from droughts and floods to industrial growth increasingly constrained by water availability.→ Why water has historically struggled to attract venture capital, and why Steve believes the market is beginning to shift.→ The “buy low, sell high” thesis for water, including why entry valuations can still be significantly lower than in hotter categories such as energy, AI or robotics.→ Why exits may matter more than IPOs, and how strategic buyers and private equity are acquiring emerging water-tech winners before they reach the public markets.→ Where the opportunities are today, advanced treatment, desalination and reuse, software, sensing, industrial water, insurance and climate resilience.→ Why industrial demand could become a major driver, particularly in semiconductors and other manufacturing processes requiring large volumes of ultrapure water.→ Where investors can get caught by hype, from ballast water to large-scale atmospheric water generation.→ How desalination could evolve, including subsea approaches designed to reduce energy consumption and environmental impact.Steve also walks through Burnt Island’s own experience. Its 2021 vintage Fund I made 18 investments and has already recorded three exits, including SewerAI, while beginning to return cash to investors.The broader argument is simple:Water may still look like a difficult, specialised category from the outside. But that complexity may be exactly why the opportunity remains underpriced.And as Steve puts it, the picture is becoming more obvious.✨ Leave a review and share the episode if this conversation challenged the way you think about growth, innovation, and sustainability. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****🌊 Financing the Hardware EraWhy climate founders need to stop treating equity as the default way to pay for CapEx.We’re joined by William Godfrey of Tangible, who has spent the past few years developing a thesis around how climate and hardtech founders should combine equity, debt, equipment finance, asset-backed lending, project finance, and other forms of capital.Because one thing is becoming increasingly clear:We’re not going to solve climate change through software alone.Climate companies need factories. Equipment. Batteries. Robots. Infrastructure. Physical assets.And financing all of that with venture equity can become an extraordinarily expensive mistake.In this episode, we go deep on how founders should actually finance capital-intensive growth — and why the best climate companies may increasingly need to become as sophisticated at financial engineering as they are at technical engineering.One framework from William stuck with me:Equity is for uncertainty. Debt is for repeatability.Equity makes sense when you’re funding something that has never been done before: R&D, prototypes, first-of-a-kind technology, new teams and markets.But once you’re repeatedly deploying an asset with increasingly predictable economics, a different pool of capital becomes available.And learning how to access it can fundamentally change the economics of the company. Listen to this episode to learn more or read this guide by Tangible. ✨ Leave a review and share the episode if this conversation challenged the way you think about growth, innovation, and sustainability. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com

Subscribe to the newsletter:New Wave | Hugo Rauch | Substack****Brought to you by:EDF: partnering with New Wave on this mini-series to explore how cleaner energy, industrial innovation, and ambitious startups can rebuild Europe’s productive edge. Discover EDF’s work with industrial and climate innovators here.****👉 Europe cannot rebuild the pastReindustrialisation does not mean bringing back the factories Europe lost in the 1980s and 1990s. With high energy prices, material dependencies, labour shortages, and fragile supply chains, Europe needs a fundamentally different model: cleaner, more automated, less resource-intensive, and more flexible.👉 Startups don’t need more pilots. They need venture customersA startup cannot rebuild European industry alone. Neither can a corporate or a VC. The real unlock could be a three-way alliance: startups create the technology, investors finance the risk, and venture customers provide credibility, industrial access, and a path to scale.But are corporates prepared to make bold commitments, or will startups remain trapped in endless €10K pilot projects?👉 Europe has a speed problemEuropean founders are asked for three years of factory data before building their first factory. American investors ask whether the same technology could work in space.Europe has grants, engineering talent, and political ambition. What it lacks is faster capital, simpler programmes, unified rules, and a greater willingness to back step changes rather than incremental improvements.The cost of moving too slowly? Europe’s most ambitious companies, and their factories, may be financed and built elsewhere.****ReferencesEDF Pulse Pilot and industrial demonstration programmesSPRIND innovation programmesEuropean Innovation Council funding programmes Europe’s net-zero manufacturing capacity objectives****Wave MakersDr. Anne Umbach — HTGFMichel Hunsicker — EDF Pulse VenturesTom Vroemen — TETMET****Chapters(00:00) Can startups help Europe reindustrialise?(01:05) What reindustrialisation actually means(03:20) The factory of the future(09:15) Does Europe need to own its industrial infrastructure?(12:30) The role startups should play(15:40) What makes an industrial startup VC-backable?(21:35) Europe’s capital gap—and the American comparison(26:30) Venture customers as the missing unlock(31:35) How EDF helps startups cross the industrialisation gap(34:25) Grants, bureaucracy, and Europe’s fragmented programmes(37:10) Bold bets versus techno-economic reality(41:20) Will customers pay a European premium?(43:35) Is Europe on track for 2030?(48:20) One wish to accelerate European industry This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit newwavenewsletter.substack.com