Entrepreneurs for Impact (EFI) Podcast: Transcripts
#100:
The Leading Flood Mapping Platform — Bessie Schwartz, CEO of Cloud to Street
Chris Wedding:
Bessie Schwartz, Co-founder and CEO of Cloud to Street, welcome to the podcast.
Bessie Schwartz:
It's great to be here.
Chris Wedding:
Listeners know a bit about your company because they've diligently listened to my intro. However, I thought we would start our podcast with some recent headlines, which make what you're doing ever more important. So, I'm just going to click over here. This is from Al Jazeera just a day or two ago.
It's talking about the recent historic flooding in Pakistan and talks about 1,700 people lost their lives, including 600 children and 33 million people were affected by the record-breaking rains. Other sources note that up to a third of the country was underwater, which is mind-blowing to comprehend. So, with that as a recent headline, Bessie, tell us what Cloud to Street does.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, so Cloud to Street focuses on the biggest climate impact, flooding, exactly the kind of situation that you just described devastatingly in Pakistan. So, every year, hundreds of millions of people are exposed to a flood. It is more than all other disasters combined in terms of the amount of the economy and number of people who are affected by it. Stack all the rest on top of each other, they don't amount to the amount of flooding. So, incredibly widespread.
The problem is that we don't have sufficient information about this disaster in order to provide the kind of safety net financially, public sector wise, in order to absorb the amount of loss that is just coming, that is baked into the atmosphere and increasing no matter how much we cut emissions even today. So Cloud to Street is really focused on that problem, starting with the information that can then enable a response to flooding.
We essentially figured out a new way to map and analyze flooding that does it from the cloud to the street rather than the ground up. We harness about 17 different satellites, other forms of big data, like ground sensors that are strapped to the internet, in order to do three things.
One, we monitor every location on earth every day, remotely, to detect floods that are happening. So, we were mapping, in fact, that flood in Pakistan as it was emerging, and there's some maps on CNN that show that.
The second thing that we do is actually run all of that remote mapping back in time so that we can understand patterns of flooding and how they're changing around the world and where risk is growing. And that map is equally accurate in Pakistan as it is in New York, because it's a fully global model, and in many ways provides equitable access to high quality flood information around the world.
The third thing that we do is then forecast those floods. So, it's a comprehensive platform leveraging big data, and really importantly, doesn't rely on ground equipment to do this.
Chris Wedding:
Sometimes I believe that I know something about climate change and then I have a guest like you, who I think just said, flooding is by far the worst climate change impact, even if you stack all the others on top of each other. Yeah, that's staggering.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, it's really remarkable, but if you think about it, flooding really is everywhere, so there's no country that is immune to this problem. It's really the fact that it's so widespread. The thing that may also be really shocking is it's one of the least understood because while it's so ubiquitous, it's actually very localized in the actual impact. It could be flooding on one side of the street, devastatingly, ruin, damaging and preventing people going out and then fine on the other side of the street because of the elevation and maybe some other dynamics there. That wouldn't really happen with a drought or things that are larger than that.
So, in many ways it requires more in-depth information than these other disasters. And so, it's one of the least understood and as a result, one of the least protected. So, only about 30% of flood losses around the world actually have insurance and a lot of other loss is unprotected with other forms of protection like pop search and rescue or government relief.
Chris Wedding:
Well, we're on video. You can see me vigorously jotting this down. Only 30% of losses are covered.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, that's a Swiss Re statistic. Yeah.
Chris Wedding:
I think what I heard you saying is like, flooding, almost in your name, from cloud to street, it's like macro driven, but on a micro level, it's so different, street to street to street.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, exactly. In many ways, that's what has made it so hard to build insurance and other financial products around, but it's incredibly critical. You just look at the kind of loss from Pakistan. If you look at what's happening basically right now in Florida, the phenomena is getting much worse. The storms are getting more intense. The river overflow is getting more intense, but one message that I really would love to convey, or I hope your listeners understand is that a lot of the actual loss from floods is actually human driven. A lot of it is people moving into floodplains and moving into places that we know will flood, building infrastructure there, building assets and loss.
While that in some ways seems dour, that to me is a really hopeful idea. Some scientists estimate that even up to 75% of increased loss from flooding is human driven. That's hopeful to me because that actually means that we can take measures that we have today, things like zoning, things like more effective financial safety nets from insurance and other types of public sector response, zoning in order to reduce the loss that's happening. Most of it is coming from us doing the reverse of this. We have it more in our control to reduce this loss.
Chris Wedding:
Okay, I agree. That's both depressing and hopeful that we're that, fill in the adjective, but that we can control that, which another note I wrote down when you were talking was, you noted that we lack great information on causes and impacts of flooding. But information alone, unfortunately, is not enough, right? Lots of us have great information about things and we still make bad decisions. How do you see you-all’s tech going from massive data processing and prediction to then the right decision actually being made? Is this part tech, is it human motivation or psychology or?
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, I completely agree. So, we at Cloud to Street, we're a very focused company, as you can tell, and we're very focused on a couple of really specific types of decisions and markets that we think are catalytic for climate adaptation. What I mean by that is we focus on insurance, specifically something called parametric flood insurance that we think can fill that massive insurance protection gap, cover a huge portion of people, risk, the economy that cannot be covered today. So, I can talk about exactly what that means in a second, but we're very focused on this type of insurance.
The second use case that we're very focused on is national disaster management agencies or public sector disaster risk reduction, both ahead of time. Things like planning or disaster management, and then better disaster response. So, I agree with you. When you think of how bad the human mind is at understanding the problem of climate change and planning for disaster in the future, it can be kind of intimidating. What we've done to solve that is really focus on a couple of key decisions and enabling those. So, we think those things can create the kinds of safety nets that I was just alluding to before. Every, oh, what if we just offered insurance or what if we did a search and rescue that I was throwing out earlier today, we have specific users who leverage our data via products that we have for them who enable that. So, those are not hypothetical.
Wouldn't it be nice if we went from, look how bad this map is to search and rescue on the ground or people getting motivated to move out of a floodplain? I'm under no illusion that that is actually a one-to-one and so I really believe that you have to focus on products to enable specific decision makers.
Chris Wedding:
Yeah, I love that. I think every listener should pay attention to the hyper focus versus trying to do too many things or assuming too much will happen as a result of your product or service. Okay, so do I hear you saying that your two customer types would be one, insurance companies or reinsurers perhaps, and then two, well, federal governments, or maybe it's not just federal, but maybe state governments as well?
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, you have it exactly right. It is insurers, reinsurers who do parametric insurance and then brokers are a really important part of this economy or market. Then on the public sector side, we do have a pretty large focus on natural disaster management agencies around the world, but state governments play a really important role, certainly here in the US when it comes to planning and responding. Then we think cities as well. We have not focused as much there, but I think cities are really emerging more and more in terms of their leadership and to protect their communities.
Chris Wedding:
Okay. Well, I know the listeners were totally enthralled by the words parametric flood insurance. So, let's get down into it. What is parametric flood insurance?
Bessie Schwartz:
So, parametric flood insurance really simply is where you have a catastrophe insurance or disaster insurance policy that triggers your payout for when the event happens based on a parameter rather than a field appraiser. So, when coming to your house, your company, your government to assess the damage. It is only done based on generally a remote, in our case, a detection of a flood happening near your building in your community, we pay out that way. We see this as a complement to the existing flood insurance market, which is about 30 billion or so. This market can be like triple or even more than that for a couple of reasons.
One, because we do not require a field presence or we don't require ground equipment in order to originally price the policy and we don't require a field presence, human adjuster, in order to design the product and operate it, we suddenly can offer this anywhere in the world for a variety of types of assets. We can do an entire country as we're doing in some cases, or we can do a specific factory in China that is a supply chain risk perhaps to a company in Denmark. So, breaks open just geographically and it also breaks open the types of what can be insured.
As you probably know, when a flood happens, when a disaster happens, it's not just the exact damage to your property that's going to create loss for you. Maybe it's the fact that you can't get in and out of your property. Or maybe it's the fact that your employees can't get in and out of the factory. Or you can't send your goods out to wherever you would sell them because the roadways were blocked. Or maybe just the market has been shut down where you are.
So, think about what's going on in Florida right now, the loss from there is huge in terms of property. It's also just huge in terms of loss, tourism value. It's huge in terms of just the businesses that can't operate there. And so, parametric insurance can really account for a larger set of business interruption or economic activity loss because it just triggers the payout based on the event happening. Not just the person going, “Yep, the porch is damaged. We'll give you payout for just the porch.” So, that's the other reason I think it's a hugely valuable asset to the way we think about risk and resilience.
This type of product, so as I mentioned, 30% of disaster losses from floods are insured today, we believe this can be the next 30% or even more of those losses can be absorbed by this method.
Chris Wedding:
Okay. On this insurance product, I think I hear two things. You all create an edge both on the pricing and on the payout on both ends. Is that right?
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, that's exactly right. Basically, we're either running our flood sensing technology in near real-time, so running it as it's happening now. That's what would replace the field appraiser because we can just detect anywhere on earth today, where is it flooding and do you deserve a payout? But then we also run that same thing back in time to say, how many times has that location been flooding, which enables us to get the statistics, the ability distributions required to know, what should be the price or the premium of that policy? So, it's really one platform, one technology that we use and it comes in all of the components you need for parametric flood insurance.
Chris Wedding:
I think you also mentioned earlier that you have 17 satellites collecting data for you-all’s models to work. Is there like a drone or lower-level data gathering component that sync up maybe after floods or how does that work?
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, definitely. So, we use a drone or there's some really cool stratospheric balloon imaging companies that have right now. We use that post facto for flooding, which can be really helpful for claims management or post-disaster event response or the people desperately trying to figure out right now if their home in Florida is still there or how damaged it is.
The thing I'll say about that, it is not in the core monitoring of what we do. It is all this post facto assessing the damage or seeing how long the water has been happening. What's really, really critical for us as the first layer of monitoring and an essential for insurers is that we have a very consistent monitoring layer for anywhere in the US, anywhere on earth. So, every single day, we are sensing everywhere and know essentially what the peak of the flood was within that day.
And so, the methods that we use for this daily monitoring are all things that we know are going to be there and cover essentially every inch of the earth every day through a variety of direct sensing and then interpolation in between. So, that's the first layer. Then we'll use a lot of other valuable data sets, drones and additional satellites after the fact to confirm, get finer resolution, really see what's going on around there.
Chris Wedding:
I love that. The other question I want to ask is business model or revenue model really. I can imagine that many users would love to treat you all as perhaps, like the software as a service, like a licensed model. I can also imagine that if you're enabling the next 30% of insured flood losses around the world to take place, that your value is way more than quote unquote, “just a license” that albeit a very high value license. I guess what is your model today? What do you want your model to be?
Bessie Schwartz:
I love this question because it’s pretty simple. So, with insurers, we do a revenue share model where if policies aren't placed, so let's say we design something for supply chain risk in China and we sell to that hypothetical Denmark company, I don't know why I picked that and then for whatever reason, they don't buy it, we don't make any money on that. The insurer doesn't make money. The broker doesn't make money. We don't make money. No money is changed hands. The product wasn't placed in the market. But if it is, we just have a revenue share model where we're taking a percentage of that. We're taking a really small percentage, so essentially what we're doing is enabling a new type of product, enabling a massive amount suddenly of flood risk to be transacted, to be transferred, and for insurers to really expand their market.
So, it's all new revenue that we're enabling with our product, and we just take a small portion of that. What this enables us to do is really grow the market together. So, it's really just a revenue or revenue share through a transaction fee.
Chris Wedding:
Okay. I'm so happy you said that. I'm so happy there's an opportunity for you all to really win, I think, as you open up huge, huge markets around the world. Yeah. Okay.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah. Exactly. This is no small task. Well, we're talking about how obvious it seems to be able to just offer, the insurers want to expand their market desperately and offer more risk and having a diversified, so balancing uncorrelated risks. So, the risk in Nigeria, let's say, or in Columbia is really important because that's really uncorrelated with risk the in Florida, which insurers have underwritten a lot of it. They really want this. It is in my mind, absolutely full stop critical to build the insurance risk transfer layer in order to survive climate change.
We need to be able to absorb the loss that's coming. We're not going to get crippled before we finally start sucking a significant bit out of the atmosphere. So, it's critical this will happen, seems obvious, but the reality is these are hard markets to move. Offering new insurance products, insurers are rightfully slow, so fairly slow when they're experimenting with new products. That makes sense for their market. They're conservative by nature and by design, and we really respect that.
And so, we really see ourselves as building this market alongside the insurer, re-insurers, brokers that we work with. It was important to us that we tie our business model with the success of everyone building what we know as a long game, massive market together.
Chris Wedding:
Let's go back to a comment you made around really ancillary losses in a flood. I think it's easy for us all to think about damage to property, residential or commercial or infrastructure. But you made a good point where it's like the business interruption insurance, you can no longer produce and sell widgets, et cetera. Both can’t come to work, there's loss of tourism. Do you have any gauge or estimates around how losses due to business interruption compared to losses due to just quote unquote, “property damage”?
Bessie Schwartz:
It's hard to quantify.
Chris Wedding:
Sure, yeah.
Bessie Schwartz:
We often will talk customer by customer and try to understand it for them, how many days of loss, how much inventory wasn't able to move because of this? Yeah, there haven't been good global assessments of this, I think, in the same way that we've seen just the overall loss estimate that is mostly driven by property.
Chris Wedding:
That's fine. I think it's a great answer to have, but it's a hard question because you said two things, hard to quantify and super customer slash site specific. I was only just raising the issue. I don't know that I understand how losses are calculated post natural disasters, but if they're largely based on property damage, boy, under counting a lot would seem to be -- That's the only takeaway I really wanted to make right there.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, it's huge. So, think about localized business interruptions, so you can't get into your factory, you're a gas station off the Golden Gate Bridge and if the Golden Gate Bridge is down or the access is flooded and so people aren't commuting in and out, you're going to lose most of your effort, even if your property is completely fine it just happens to be flooded on the other side of the bridge.
But then break that out even more and think about the supply chain interruption created by COVID and that is measured in the trillions of just pure disruption that happened there. So, maybe you’re functioning fine in your locality, but you rely on some widget for your product in China or your hardware computer chips in Thailand. The computer chip market at one point in the 2010s was completely shut down because of a flooding in Thailand where industrial parks that produced a large number of them had been majorly flooded and were famously fairly underinsured.
So, really break it out and when you think about how connected the global economy is now and how concentrated some of the major product production or supply chain production locations are around the world and flooding affecting them can just affect the global economy overall. So, the number is in the trillions.
Chris Wedding:
Yeah. I think I've heard a story recently of farmers who maybe they need a replacement part for their tractor or corn binder that cost whatever, $150, but can't get it due to these supply chain concerns. And so, hundreds of thousands of dollars of crops just sit there, hopefully not past the point at which they can be harvested and monetized. Okay, let's go back to the company origin perhaps. So, this is not like a new thing that you all are working on. Tell us about the genesis and its evolution over the last X number of years.
Bessie Schwartz:
It’s been a long journey, I'd say. So, I started working on the science behind the technology today with my co-founder about 10 years ago and that was originally in collaboration with Google. The long story short there is, she had been a disaster relief worker internationally. I'd been working on climate change in the US and we both realized there was a massive lack of information, a lack of access to high quality information all over the world.
So, we were in grad school learning the traditional method of hydrology, another disaster measurement when Google came to Yale and showed us a really early version of their satellite analytics platform. Essentially, they had taken NASA's repositories, so history of all of NASA's data for a couple of decades at that point and put it on Google servers and said like, “What do you think?”
Beth and I immediately saw that a new way was possible. Rather than relying on the very ground equipment, heavy modeled approach we were learning in school, we now had the wealth of data that we needed from the sky, hence, Cloud to Street in order to get information back to the communities, back to the governments, back to the businesses we had been working with in the various locations before.
We basically began building an algorithm while we were students there for this use case, Google caught wind of it and then became really big supporters of us. We got research grants to build out the work. It was really right away that we had governments, I don't even know how they found out about us, to be honest, governments around the world.
So, governments here in the US, I'll date myself, but this is right after Hurricane Sandy, a couple months after, and there was a really big use case in New York State. Then governments internationally where literally the first use case we worked in, 5,000 people had died the year before in a flood, in a massive glacier outburst in the Himalayas. And the government still didn't have new flood maps, and the World Bank was spending a huge amount of money to help rebuild this area. They essentially said, “Could you guys just help us figure out the new floodplains after this event?” They eventually would put in place a really good new hydrology system, traditional ground equipment-based approach. So, that was really the kind of work we were doing for years and helping governments all over the world get the information they need to rebuild, to plan for the next one and respond.
Over that time, basically two things became really clear, two messages we kept hearing that made it obvious how much finance is just part of this problem and needs to be part of the solution. That two sides of the same coin came together. So, we would sit with ministers of these governments and they would say to us, “Okay, fantastic. I can see right now that search and rescue is required in that part of the country, and I can see that I obviously need to put infrastructure over here. With what extra money am I going to take all of these climate adaptation actions?”
Same time we're hearing the flip side of the coin where global insurance and re-insurance are approaching us saying, “We desperately want to offer products in places we've never been able to before for business interruption, which we've never really been able to do in a comprehensive way. You guys have the first data set we've seen that's really equally high quality in all these places. Could we use this to underwrite on?”
We were like, “Okay, we need to put two and two together here.”
Obviously, it's not that simple. You have to design new products and underwriting capabilities. I think it's detrimental to underestimate the simplicity of doing all of this because insurance models are pretty complicated, but we've been really thrilled with the partners that we've had really on both sides of that equation.
Chris Wedding:
Well, I think one of the many takeaways from that is a 10-year journey and the other, I think, is that when you have something that is super valuable, people will find you. Somehow, they will find you, as they are finding you for many years.
I want to switch this over to the other part of the pod around the more personal side. I want to flag one last thing just for 30 seconds before we go there. You just mentioned the term or the need, the sector climate adaptation and I just wanted to raise that as food for later thought for listeners along the lines of a stat, which I'm going to read here from a recent newsletter of mine.
It talks about work from a 2021 report from the Climate Policy Initiative, showing only 7% of climate related investment went to climate adaptation. I'm sure you've seen this. And then Bank of America said that the climate adaptation market could be worth $2 trillion per year within the next five years. So, I just think as listeners are digesting what you're doing, there's a clear need for, not just the obvious, reduce carbon emissions, but also to adapt to the inherent warming that is here and is going to come. Okay, that's a lot. Any quick word before we go to the Bessie story?
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, this is such an important point, so I'm really glad that you brought it up. I think that 7% statistic is one that we really need to think about a lot more, especially as a climate tech investing community and as the governments who are thinking about where we're going to put our resources to build the future climate affected economy. So, the thing I'll just say is that, I think by a lot of strong estimates the planet no matter how much we've reduced emissions in the next 20 years, so even if we were to stop emitting greenhouse gases today, the planet would continue to warm for the next 20 years. That is more storms, that is more droughts, that's more of the effect of climate change. So, this thing is here now and we need to address that.
We also need to start sucking carbon out of the atmosphere. We need to completely change our energy portfolio. All that stuff is important for the decades to come. We got to survive this next 20 years. 7% is not going to cut it. We need to start redirecting more money to this and the hopeful thing is, as I mentioned, in my 10 years, I've increasingly started to see climate change as a finance problem, a capital distribution problem. Both in a macro sense and a minor sense.
I've seen households where they had to take their kids out of school and set back their families by a generation because they didn't have the money after the event. I've seen governments where you can literally see GDP go down because they did not have the capital to bounce back afterwards. You see this with companies, it is individual companies as well. You do not have the resources to respond to a disaster, you can have a replicable loss from it.
Similar with prevention, we need to invest in that. So, in many ways, we have the solutions on the adaptations. The solutions we're using already, insurance or zoning, et cetera, but we need the finance in order to actually take those actions. We’ve got the information, we've got the decisions, and we need to distribute the capital. I don't know if that sounds hard or big, but that to me is way more in hand to solve the problem we have, the crisis we have here and now today than a lot of the other stuff that we also have to do.
Chris Wedding:
Well, we could talk for a couple more hours on that particular topic, but we're not. I believe there is an important government meeting phone call when do they get you to in a few minutes here. Let's go for the last five minutes here to the Bessie story. Bessie, if you could chat with your younger self, what advice might you give her to be faster, more effective, happier, et cetera?
Bessie Schwartz:
That's such a hard question. So, this is professionally speaking, so lots of other tips, personally, but to make sure to take time to take a step back in what you're doing. And so, I think as founders, we're just building, building, building, and running as fast as we can to create the vision that we want. I have found the more that I build in time to just think, frankly, or just read about stuff that's related or maybe not related to what I'm doing, just reading, frankly, good literature helps you understand and digest the plans you have, the information you're getting.
So, if I had a recommendation to my younger self, it really would be about building in more strategically, literally just into my calendar and seeing it as work to take this time away. Not just doing and producing, but to reflect on the strategies, what we're doing, the situation in the world and in our market. [Crosstalk – 00:36:23] tips, yeah, to do that. It's easier said than done.
Chris Wedding:
Totally, I'll double down on that. This is a recurring topic for the CEOs in these peer groups that are run at Entrepreneurs for Impact where it's like you just said, think time almost need to show up as a block of time, ideally longer than 90 minutes on your calendar. I mean, I just started something similar last year where I'll take a spring and fall solo retreat just for a Friday to Sunday in a tiny house in the mountains of North Carolina, bunch of books, notes to write things down, hikes, of course the breweries. But yeah, the creativity and perspective is priceless.
Let's go to the next one, Bessie. What are some habits or routines that keep you focused, healthy, and sane?
Bessie Schwartz:
I'll say a couple come to mind here that really are all linked together. One, not going to be shocking is just meditation, but what I do basically in the morning is try to stack meditation in with a couple of other key habits. I think habit stacking is really important.
Chris Wedding:
Amen.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, I’m a big fan of the book.
Chris Wedding:
Atomic Habits.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, exactly. I find it’s a really easy way especially for folks who are less structured naturally, and I find if you can put some structure in place that are, I just do this rod, it helps you have more creativity in other parts. So, you pick something that you always do every morning. I no matter what, drink coffee as soon as possible in the morning. What I do is I habit stack drinking coffee, I then write down what my one, maybe two priority is for the day. I think, “If I can accomplish one thing today, what is that?” And that becomes my focus for, no matter what comes at me or what's going on, basically I'm saying, “Okay, am I accomplishing this?” And it helps calm you down and think like, this is the one thing that's really going to matter in a week, in two months, I wish I had done on this day. So, I write that down. Then I meditate for an embarrassingly short amount of time.
Chris Wedding:
Hey, you're still doing it. Yeah.
Bessie Schwartz:
Exactly. Just to calm down and then jump into all the chaos from there. But I always do those things which it really helps me take a step back and make sure that I'm focused on the right things and focused on it with really a steady mind.
Chris Wedding:
I love the details in that. I know we're at our time here. I would just call out that book you referenced, Atomic Habits by James Clear, habit stacking, great concept or tool to use. The other, which you mentioned by name, but not by title, which is The ONE Thing, which is a great book by Gary Keller around just what you described. Bessie, so much more we could talk about. What's a final message, call to action, et cetera, you'd like to leave listeners with?
Bessie Schwartz:
I want to just double down on the real both urgency of now and the possibility, the feasibility of adaptation. It gets underinvested and under looked at, but I think it is really the most hopeful part in many ways of the massive overhaul we need to do for our economy and how society is arranged. Adaptation is the thing that we know how to do as a community, as a country, as a globe and it really is the matter of just allocating the right financial resources to the right decisions and empowering people to take those decisions.
Chris Wedding:
Hear, hear. Hey, look, we're rooting for you-all’s success at Cloud to Street and hopefully folks will come check out online.
Bessie Schwartz:
Yeah, thank you so much. It's been really fun.
Chris Wedding:
Cheers.
Thank you so much for listening. Seriously, the world needs you and I know your time is super valuable. If you want more content like this, please subscribe to our weekly newsletter at entrepreneursforimpact.com. If you like this podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. I read every single one, I promise. These reviews are the number one way to draw more attention to the world-changing climate CEOs and investors that I'm lucky enough to be interviewing on the show. And each month I pick one listener review for a one-on-one brainstorming call with me. Who knows what can come of those?
Finally, if you're a growth stage climate CEO looking for a confidential peer group to share best practices, expand your network and scale your business, then please apply to join our Climate Mastermind programs at Entrepreneurs for Impact where our current amazing members have created over $4 billion in company value to mitigate climate change. Until next time, keep on fighting those good fights.