"Michele_Demers".
With a unique blend of analytical expertise and passionate environmental advocacy, Michele Demers is the founder and CEO of Boundless Impact Research & Analytics. She leads her team in delivering precise, objective, actionable insights to expedite investments in sustainable technologies and eco-friendly companies. Boundless uses a science-based, data-driven methodology grounded in the proven success of lifecycle assessment and serves a growing universe of investors, companies, and funds. With 25 years of diverse experience, Michele has been instrumental in developing over two dozen startups and is celebrated for her innovative approach to environmental impact measurement. She also mentors emerging cleantech ventures through Heritage Group Accelerator and TechStars, holding a Master’s in International Relations and Communications from Boston University.
I founded Boundless about eight years ago. The latest iteration of our company, which focuses on environmental research and analytics, began in 2018. Our mission is to provide objective, actionable impact analytics to accelerate investment dollars in clean technologies and companies driving positive environmental change. We achieve this through a proprietary, science-based, data-driven approach grounded in lifecycle assessment. This lifecycle assessment method, which we will be discussing today, has been around for decades and is an internationally standardized methodology.
Investors need high-quality environmental data; cleantech companies require it, too, to differentiate their products, scale effectively, secure funding, and disrupt industries. We work across various sectors, including energy, transportation, food, agriculture, advanced materials, circular economy, and water—industries currently experiencing massive disruption due to climate solutions and the climate crisis.
Sure. Before Boundless Impact Research & Analytics, I had a whole previous career that evolved into what I do now. I worked in international development, human rights, and philanthropy. I worked for Silicon Valley billionaires Pierre and Pam Omidyar, the founders of eBay, and helped them start a foundation. We were doing impact investing before the term was coined, around 2007-2008.
During that time, I realized that we need entirely new industries to address issues like the climate crisis. I became passionate about building new markets to solve significant problems. As I got involved, I noticed that impact measurement was ineffective. Investors like the Omidyars, who were putting significant capital at risk, deserved quality research and data from the companies they were investing in. This realization led us to focus more on impact measurement.
In 2018, we discovered the methodology of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This internationally standardized approach provides accurate environmental and techno-economic performance data. Identifying these technologies within an industry can be game changers. We developed our methodology and have conducted LCAs across hundreds of industries since then.
Our team of environmental engineers produces trustworthy scores and metrics. These are validated by external industry and scientific experts, ensuring unbiased results—all part of the Lifecycle assessment approach. Investors find our reports reliable, and companies use them to accelerate fundraising and business development, acquire customers faster. This data empowers companies and investors the ability to differentiate their products.
LCA, or Life Cycle Assessments, systematically evaluates the environmental impact of a product throughout its entire life cycle. This means considering inputs and outputs at each stage, including resource use, energy consumption, emissions, and waste generation. Different industries have varying system boundaries.
For instance
It depends on the product’s development stage. Startups may not have end-of-life data, so it’s often excluded. Using technology readiness levels (TRL), early-stage companies (TRL 4-6) might only have a prototype, while more advanced companies can include broader boundaries like cradle-to-cradle. Accuracy is about selecting the best units of measure. At Boundless, we use environmental key performance indicators (EKPIs) tailored to each industry, guided by internationally standardized LCA databases like Ecoinvent.
An LCA is mandatory to obtain a Carbon Credit Certification for a product with significant emissions reduction benefits. Carbon standard-setting bodies (CSSBs) require an LCA for certification. Additionally, you can’t achieve an environmental product declaration in the U.S. or Europe without an LCA, which validates that your product is environmentally sustainable.
Lifecycle assessment (LCA) is crucial because it goes beyond the familiar Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions outlined by the UN GHG Protocol.
Scope Definitions:
Key Differences between LCA and Scope 1, 2, 3:
Advantages of LCA:
At Boundless, we also offer GHG scenario analysis, which uses LCA to analyze current emissions and build realistic reduction strategies, leading to more sustainable products and operations.
Yes, absolutely. At Boundless, we also conduct techno-economic analysis alongside Life Cycle Assessment. By analyzing costs and lifecycle data, we can measure metrics like carbon abatement’s marginal cost and return on investment. This helps companies reduce emissions and understand the economic implications of their environmental strategies. Integrating cost analysis, product economics, and scalability factors through techno-economic analysis connects the dots and provides a comprehensive view.
While many firms perform LCAs and do a great job, some companies attempt to conduct LCAs themselves through self-reporting. I strongly advise against this because self-reported LCAs often lead to greenwashing. Companies might choose metrics that make them look good and omit those that do not.
When a third party conducts a lifecycle assessment, they select the metrics. Additionally, not all LCA firms do this, but we do this at Boundless Impact. We hire an independent industry expert to review the data provided by the company. This ensures the company cannot manipulate its data. Often, companies do not do this intentionally, but accurate accounting of emissions and other environmental factors (such as toxicity, air pollution, water footprint, or land footprint- depending on the industry) is important. Using an independent expert to review the data ensures all factors are properly accounted for. It is very much an accounting exercise.
Sure. Here, I’m showing a sample of the metrics we call Environmental Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). We selected these for a biopesticide company and compared them to traditional industrial pesticides. The metrics we selected in this case were:
Each industry has a unique set of environmental impact metrics. We facilitate accurate apples-to-apples comparisons by using the same metrics for every technology and company within an industry.
Yes, let me show you. This is a green chemical company, and here are the metrics we selected for this industry. This example involves green ethyl acetate production, which we compared to traditional ethyl acetate. Traditional ethyl acetate, used in many household products, is typically made from fossil fuel feedstock. This company, however, uses an agricultural feedstock, which is much healthier.
We assessed the GHG footprint and benchmarked it against traditional manufacturing methods for ethyl acetate, including esterification, direct addition, and dehydrogenation. Veritas is the company we assessed, represented by the light blue bars in the bar chart.
Right. We also looked at other metrics like human toxicity and particulate matter emissions. We modeled these for competitors and showed how the process had a considerable reduction in both. My team of engineers conducts primary research to build our own industry benchmarks, ensuring the reliability of our results.
Yes, this holistic overview compares the technology to others and scores the company through relative comparisons within its industry. These insights are invaluable for investors, de-risking their investments and enabling companies to use our reports to raise funds more quickly.
Yes.
Companies often expect to show reduced GHG emissions, but sometimes, our assessments reveal higher emissions, especially for new market entrants without production efficiencies. Factors like global sourcing can result in high GHG footprints. We help them model ways to reduce this, such as sourcing locally or using renewable energy grids near their manufacturing sites.
Occasionally, we must tell companies what they don’t want to hear. They may expect their sustainability story to be a home run but find the LCA results counterintuitive. We let the data speak for itself without manipulation. While this can disappoint some customers, it highlights areas needing improvement for a better sustainability footprint.
Right, exactly. It’s also crucial to ensure companies use proper LCA methods. Many companies attempt to conduct LCAs themselves instead of using a trained third party. This leads to data integrity issues, as some companies use industry data points inaccurately, claiming them as their product performance. While it might simplify filling out an ESG questionnaire, it risks significant inaccuracies.
Definitely visit our website, boundlessimpact.net, to stay informed on the latest updates in lifecycle assessment and climate impact measurement. It’s essential for companies to understand LCA and its benefits. Additionally, businesses operating in Europe should recognize that European regulations are stricter than those in the U.S. European markets require measurements of GHG emissions, air pollution, water footprint, toxicity footprint, and ocean plastics composition.
I also want to mention the GREET (Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Technologies) model developed by Argonne National Lab, affiliated with the Department of Energy. Carbon intensity scoring began at GREET with transportation fuels and is now becoming a standard for assessing environmental performance. It’s an effective tool for understanding the emissions reduction potential of products. Following the GREET model is becoming conventional wisdom in the market.
The Advanced Bioeconomy Leadership Forum is one of the best cleantech conferences. It covers sustainable fuels, new biotechnologies, agricultural biotech, biorefineries, and sustainable jet fuels. I attended in October and found it incredibly content-rich and impressive. Next week, I’m attending the Slush Conference in Helsinki, Finland, the world’s biggest clean tech conference. It’s my first time there, and I’m excited about it!
You have to pay to access Eco Invent. Publicly available databases might not be very useful. You can use the EPA’s WARM (Waste Reduction Model) and the GREET model, which I previously mentioned. The WARM model calculates waste emissions. However, relying on free resources may not be as reliable as hiring a third-party assessment.
Lifecycle assessment and environmental impact measurement are not optional; they are essential. As we move toward a carbon-priced world, companies not conducting honest emissions reporting will face negative balance sheets and stranded assets. Companies integrating renewable energy and sustainability strategies will be the stocks to invest in. Investors must view lifecycle assessment data as critical for de-risking investments. Skepticism about data is necessary, as there is widespread greenwashing. Truly impactful technologies achieve gigaton or megaton emissions reductions, not just tons or kilotons. Investors must educate themselves on setting and understanding such targets. Breakthrough Energy Ventures is one example of an organization with a focus on significant emissions reduction targets.
Our website is boundlessimpact.net, and you can email me at mdmers@boundlessimpact.net. I’m also on LinkedIn, where we have an active page. I recommend following us there. We’re excited to conduct more LCAs for emerging products. Please follow us on our website and LinkedIn.