• Startups like Equatic and Climeworks develop ways to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
• Carbon removal helps businesses meet ESG goals and offset emissions through a carbon credits system.
• This article is part of "Transforming Business," a series on the must-know leaders and trends impacting industries.

Out on a barge in Los Angeles, a team of engineers is hard at work tweaking the designs of a collection of machines with multiple tubes attached to tanks filled with air and different minerals.

The team works for a startup called Equatic, which uses a process called sea electrolysis to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Seawater runs through an electrolyzer, which separates the water into an acid and a base. Rock minerals neutralize the acid, and the base mixes with CO2 from the atmosphere. This results in carbonates that can safely return to the ocean.

Carbon removal technologies, like those developed by Equatic, can transform businesses by helping them reduce their legacy carbon footprint. For many companies with environmental, social, and governance goals, investing in carbon removal through the purchase of carbon credits helps them offset their emissions and get closer to their goal of being "net zero." For rapidly developing industries like artificial intelligence that massively consume energy, implementing carbon removal could help offset emissions in the long term.

The idea of Equatic emerged in the research labs at the University of California, Los Angeles, with a team led by its cofounder Gaurav Sant, a sustainability professor at the school.

Sant said that his team began thinking about how to activate and expand the capacity of oceans, which already naturally absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. Processes such as sea electrolysis have been used for decades, though scaling ocean carbon removal technology has started only in the past few years. Sant said his experience as a cement chemist helped him consider ways to reduce carbon emissions.

"There was very little attention that was being paid truthfully to reducing the carbon intensity of cement production and concrete construction," Sant said. "The journey started with low-carbon cement and low-carbon concrete, and from there, it sort of went into a bunch of other things."

For startups that want to break into the industry and market their product's integrity, they must make carbon removal measurable. At the development plant in Los Angeles, Equatic engineers measure the machinery's ability to remove carbon and produce hydrogen. They then quantify carbon removal results. They also publish their findings in peer-reviewed scientific research papers.

Equatic is developing the world's largest ocean-based carbon removal plant in Singapore, a demonstration project in partnership with the country's National Water Agency. The plan for the new plant is to remove 4,000 tons of CO2 annually and create 300 kg of carbon-negative hydrogen a day, according to its website. If these projects succeed, Equatic intends to take its idea to a commercial scale.

For Climeworks, a Zurich carbon removal startup, scaling has taken place gradually over the past fifteen years. The company uses direct air capture technology at its plants to suck CO2 out of the air and then later mineralize it into a solid rock form and store it underground.

"What carbon removal can offer to businesses is making sure that CO2 in the atmosphere, or climate in general, is not a barrier to growth," Jan Wurzbacher, the CEO of Climeworks, said.

The carbon credits market has shortcomings

While these companies plan to scale commercially, startups like Equatic sell carbon credits to businesses and individuals who want to reduce their carbon footprint. Two of Equatic's customers are Boeing and Stripe. Climeworks counts Microsoft, Boston Consulting Group, and Shopify as clients.

The carbon credits market is highly unregulated, dotted with stories of credits sold but followed by incomplete actions and scams. An investigation by The Washington Post found that some carbon credit ventures reaped profits from protected public lands in the Brazilian Amazon forests and failed to share profits with locals. Essentially, these ventures gave the impression that they would reduce emissions but used lands they had no rights to, possibly invalidating the credits they said they would offset for companies such as Netflix, Salesforce, and Boeing.

"Some 'cheaper' carbon credits that you can buy are not easily verifiable," said Indroneil Ganguly, an environmental and forests sciences professor at the University of Washington.

Critics of carbon credits argue that this system allows businesses to continue polluting. Some businesses, such as Occidental Petroleum, invest in carbon removal and use the process to extract more fossil fuels. While telling businesses to cut emissions would be ideal, Wurzbacher said that cutting them entirely or converting to more sustainable practices could be costly and not immediate.

Carbon removal can be expensive

Even at the rapid scaling rate of these carbon removal startups, their emissions removal is only a small drop in the sea. In 2022 alone, the global aviation industry emitted 800 megatons of CO2. In comparison, Climework's first commercial plant in Iceland, called Orca, can remove 4,000 tons a year, the company says. Climeworks said its larger Mammoth plant would be able to remove 36,000 tons.

The biggest hurdle for carbon removal startups like Equatic and Climeworks is cost. A plus side of Equatic's sea electrolysis process is that it creates hydrogen, which can be used as a clean energy source and lower the technology's costs.

"So you push the price down, right, and that's what stimulates the market," Edward Sanders, the CEO of Equatic, said.

What's more, carbon removal is a voluntary purchase and an elastic good, meaning that it depends on the desire of individuals or businesses to participate, and the demand can shift significantly with price.

"The way in which we are going to get the necessary volumes is going to be at a price point they can accept and still manufacture the goods they are making and clear the services they do," Sanders said.

The cost to permanently remove 1 ton of CO2 right now is between $600-$1,000. Scaling up existing technology requires more laborers and building very specific machinery, Wurzbacher said. Both Climeworks and Equatic have received grants from the US Department of Energy, including a grant for Climeworks to subsidize its expansions in Louisiana and Texas.

This year, Climeworks expanded beyond permanent carbon removal and began offering a new solutions branch of its business. If the direct air capture method is too expensive for customers, Climeworks finds a portfolio of other options they can use, such as reforestation and biomass storage.

The incoming Trump administration raises questions about the future of carbon removal and whether companies will be motivated to cut emissions. 

Both Climeworks' and Equatic's respective CEOs said that while timelines and execution could change, these solutions still had bipartisan support and political momentum. Also, carbon removal itself is inherently adaptive.

"The nice thing about direct air capture," Wurzbacher said, "is that you can basically do it anywhere in the world and have your customers at a very different place."

• Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger is out of the top spot after a challenging 4-year tenure.
• The company's interim co-CEOs addressed the workforce Monday morning in an all-hands meeting.
• One Intel employee described the responses to questions as "vague" and the tone of the meeting as "damage control".

On Monday morning, Intel employees joined an all-hands meeting after receiving an email invite at 5 a.m. PT.

Accompanying the invite was the news that the company's CEO Pat Gelsinger had stepped down as of Sunday, and would be temporarily replaced by co-CEOs David Zinsner, Intel's chief financial officer for nearly three years, and Michelle Johnston Holthaus, the new CEO of product.

Gelsinger's move came without warning. He isn't staying on to transition out slowly or help with the search for his replacement. Come 9 a.m. the pair of fresh co-CEOs were bombarded with questions.

Why did Gelsinger leave so suddenly? What kind of CEO is Intel trying to get now? How can employees trust leadership after repeated missteps?, employees asked.

The man at the center of the conversation was not there. Being CEO of Intel was Pat Gelsinger's dream since he joined the company as a teenager in 1979. He achieved it improbably after being ousted once already.

"He was the prodigal son returning," described Alvin Nguyen, senior analyst at Forrester. Gelsinger returned a savior, but now he's retiring at 63 and Intel is far from saved. Multiple outlets reported Monday that Gelsinger's departure is the result of board rancor, with Bloomberg reporting that the CEO was given the choice to retire or be removed from the job.

Gelsinger's departure was a "personal decision", executives repeated in the all-hands, according to a current employee in attendance.

Intel's interim leadership brings deep knowledge of the company's finances, products, and customers.

Zisner has overseen the recent cost-cutting effort, and Holthaus has been steeped in Intel for nearly 20 years. But no one at the top has the technical expertise of Gelsinger, which Intel employees pointed out in their questions. Yet despite his technical prowess as Intel's first chief technology officer, Intel remains in critical condition.

The leaders emphasized that the company goals would not change: employees would improve efficiency and, reduce costs, and the company would need to execute better with products and with the crucial 18A process.

Holthaus told employees on the call that her leadership style is direct and transparent, according to the employee in attendance. She reminded them that she has worked at Intel for many years.

Intel declined to comment, but a spokesperson pointed to Gelsinger's departure press release.

Contending with Intel's many misses

Intel has more than 65% of the market for traditional PCs and 85% of the server market, according to Edward Jones. Yet critical missteps plague the company. Zisner and Holthaus likely can't wait for an executive search to conclude to address them.

Supporting the passage of the CHIPS Act and obtaining its promised funding has been a major focus of Gelsinger's nearly 4-year term as CEO. However, the funding is contingent upon hitting execution benchmarks, with which the company has struggled.

Last week, the Department of Commerce finalized its direct funding for Intel under the CHIPS Act, totaling $7.865 billion. Said funding fell short of the original amount of $8.5 billion announced.

"While we have made significant progress in regaining manufacturing competitiveness and building the capabilities to be a world-class foundry, we know that we have much more work to do at the company and are committed to restoring investor confidence," said Frank Yeary, now Intel's interim board executive chair, said in a statement.

Intel's overall fall from grace is most apparent in the context of the rise in the importance of accelerated computing and AI.

In 2021, when Gelsinger took over as CEO, shares of Nvidia were trading below $30. The GPU designer's recent rise to one of the most valuable companies in the world has put a spotlight on Intel's relative absence from the accelerated computing race that Nvidia has come to dominate. Median pay at Intel has remained stagnant the last five years compared to other competitors as employee cuts continue.

Gelsinger said last month that the company would miss its target of $500 million in sales this year of its AI chip, Gaudi 3. But analysts told Business Insider that 18A, the company's most advanced manufacturing node, is actually more important to Intel's resurgence than making a splash in AI.

"Intel has ostensibly 'bet' the company on 18A for salvation," Bernstein analysts wrote.

The costs of bringing this node online are likely to increase further, and it "still to get any external validation from large fabless customers," according to Bank of America analyst Vivek Arya. But this expensive work is essential to bring Intel back to the cutting edge and make it an attractive partner for bleeding-edge chip designers like Nvidia.

"The importance of bringing manufacturing back in-house can't be overstated," Futurum Group CEO Daniel Newman told BI. The fate of the company, and the legacy of Gelsinger rides on it.

"The cornerstone of Pat's tenure as CEO was built upon Intel achieving process leadership or at least parity and if they cannot execute with 18A, then it was all for naught," Logan Purk, senior research analyst at Edward Jones, told BI. Given slow-moving technological progress and cost-cutting, and fast-moving competitors, Intel's next CEO may be inheriting a harder job than Gelsinger did.

"It was a tough situation when Pat showed up, and things look much worse now," Bernstein analysts wrote in a note to investors.

No one has been a closer witness to this roller coaster than Intel employees, who have seen multiple waves of layoffs and buyouts.

Monday's meeting had the distinct flavor of "damage control", according to the employee.

Intel shares were down 60% Monday, compared to the day Gelsinger took the CEO job. However, shares jumped slightly upon Monday's announcement of Gelsinger's retirement.

Got a tip? Contact this reporter at [email protected] or use the secure messaging app Signal with the username hliwrites.99.

Have a tip or an insight to share? Contact Emma at [email protected] or use the secure messaging app Signal: 443-333-9088

• Intel's median employee pay rose 4% in five years, lagging behind other tech firms.
• Other tech companies like Nvidia and Microsoft increased pay by at least 12%.
• Intel plans to cut $10 billion in expenses and expand chip factories with new CHIPS Act funding.

Intel's median employee pay has only increased by 4% over the past five years, an analysis of annual proxy statements filed with the SEC showed.

In comparison, other chipmakers and Big Tech companies like Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm, and Microsoft have boosted their average pay by at least 12%. The reports do not break down pay by gender.

In 2019, Intel's average employee pay was $96,300. It increased to $104,400 in 2021 before dropping to $96,400 the next year. In 2023, Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger and higher-level staff took pay cuts while also instituting "thank you" bonuses in the form of one-time restricted-stock-unit grants for employees.

Besides stagnating pay, Intel employees have seen other setbacks. Executives at the American chipmaker have said it would cut $10 billion in expenses by restructuring its staff and foundry businesses. This fall, Intel cut about 15% of its employees through voluntary buyouts and layoffs and slashed staff perks, as Business Insider reported.

After a year of increased lobbying, Intel was awarded $7.9 billion in grant funding through the Department of Commerce's CHIPS and Science Act on Tuesday, with $1 billion expected to be given by the end of the year. The funding amount is $600 million less than previously anticipated.

Intel plans to expand its chip factories in Ohio and Phoenix with new funding and has already invested billions of its own money for construction. Industry analysts said that Intel's future financial success will depend on its ability to execute on time for its customers.

Qualcomm had reportedly expressed an interest in buying Intel, although the merger would face many operational and regulatory hurdles. Buyout interest has cooled down, Bloomberg reported.

Got a tip? Contact this reporter at [email protected] or use the secure messaging app Signal with the username hliwrites.99.

• The CHIPS and Science Act, offering over $30 billion in incentives, spurred semiconductor lobbying.
• Nvidia, TSMC, and Intel are enhancing government relations amid evolving trade policies.
• Most heads of government relations and lobbyists are part of the "revolving door."

In 2022, Nvidia spent $90,000 on lobbying in Washington. In 2023, that number quintupled to more than $500,000.

While Big Tech companies have spent millions lobbying in Washington, DC, on issues such as AI and antitrust regulation, the CHIPS and Science Act, which is set to give out more than $30 billion in incentives funding to chip companies, kicked things into high gear for the semiconductor industry. The Department of Commerce said in November that Intel will receive about $7.9 billion in federal grants.

American manufacturers like Intel and Micron boosted their lobbying funding, while foreign companies like TSMC assembled their DC-based government relations teams in response. And while chip designers like Nvidia and AMD are not direct CHIPS Act funding recipients, they hold an interest in shifting manufacturing dependence on TSMC in case of any geopolitical conflicts in Taiwan.

Business Insider reviewed lobbying public disclosure reports associated with various chip companies and focused on the top listed lobbyists and governmental affairs departments. Most members were part of the "revolving door," switching from staffing on the hill, campaigns, and other agencies to the private sector.

"Given that more government policies are impacting the chip industry relative to several years ago–tariffs, incentives, tax policies, etc.— it isn't surprising that the chip industry is focusing more on this," said Chris Miller, the author of the book "Chip War: The Fight for the World's Most Critical Technology."

President Joe Biden's administration has scrambled to finalize CHIPS Act funding since the election of Donald Trump, who advocated for higher tariffs and attacked the bipartisan legislation in an interview with Joe Rogan in October.

A Department of Commerce spokesperson said in November that the department has awarded over $10 billion so far and expects to allocate all incentives funds this year.

Companies will push to finalize their CHIPS Act grants in the short term and try to build more connections with Republican policymakers in the long term, said Lori Yue, an associate management professor at Columbia Business School who studies corporate political strategy.

"Government change would definitely affect lobbying as the executive branch has a lot of power in terms of regulation," she said.

The Department of Commerce spokesperson said that the due diligence and negotiation processes for finalizing funding are "bespoke" for each applicant. The spokesperson declined to comment on chip lobbying efforts and the specifics of individual CHIPS applicants.

Yue said that hiring lobbyists depends on what expertise and networks they already have.

"For example, they have worked on certain governmental issues before. They really know every single regulatory procedure on this issue. That person can be very valuable. Besides what they know is who they know: how can this person bring the company's perspective to the policymakers and connect to the person in power?" said Yue.

Trump nominated Howard Lutnick, CEO of investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald and an advocate for tariffs, as his commerce secretary.

Nvidia

Lobbying spend in 2024: $480,000

Top firms: Nickles Group, Tiber Creek Group

Current top lobbyists: Luke Holland, Don Kent, Jeff Choudhry

CHIPS Act recipient amount: N/A

Top issues: CHIPS and Science Act implementation, semiconductor design and fabrication, AI policy, overseas restrictions of exports and chips trade

While Nvidia employs its own government affairs office, it uses outside firms rather than in-house lobbyists. The Nickles Group was founded by former Oklahoma Republican Sen. Don Nickles, who served 24 years in Congress and focused heavily on deregulation and tax reduction for businesses.

Luke Holland previously served as chief of staff to Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma. Holland's practice focuses on areas such as aviation, defense, and trade.

Before transitioning to The Nickles Group, Jeff Choudhry worked on Capitol Hill for Arizona's Republican Rep. Trent Franks, acting as a liaison to the House Judiciary Committee. He focused on issues such as interstate commerce, taxation, bankruptcy, and other commercial law. His practice now focuses on antitrust, mergers and acquisitions, IT, and foreign policy related to China.

Don Kent has served in a wide range of positions within the legislative and executive branches in Washington. His practice draws from working at the Department of Homeland Security, at the US Senate Budget Committee, and with senators, focusing on immigration, foreign relations, and technology.

Nvidia declined to comment beyond public filings.

TSMC

Lobbying spend in 2024: $2.32 million

Top firms: TSMC government affairs

Current top lobbyists: Peter Cleveland, Nicholas Montella, Claire Sanderson Hambrick, Stefanie Dearie

CHIPS Act recipient amount: $6.6 billion, finalized November 15

Top issues: CHIPS and Science Act implementation, US-Taiwan relations, investment taxes, tax reductions for Taiwanese residents, export and trade regulations, immigration, workforce development, environmental permits for chip factories

TSMC expanded its US-based government relations department to address the rise in US-China trade tensions and the ban on exports to Huawei. One of the company's first hires was Peter Cleveland, a former Intel lobbyist for over a decade, who took on the position of senior vice president. Before working for Intel, Cleveland worked with former Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Robb.

Other TSMC lobbyists bring experience dealing with Asia-Pacific affairs. Nicholas Montella began his career working as an ESL instructor in China and South Korea before shifting to Washington. He ultimately served as the director of Japan, Korea, and APEC policy in the US Chamber of Commerce.

Claire Sanderson Hambrick served as a lead policy advisor for Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, working on legislation such as the CHIPS for America Act and the Secure 5G and Beyond Act.

Stefanie Dearie is a former Hill staffer who focused on monetary policy and trade. She worked at Accenture's government relations team before joining TSMC as a senior counsel.

TSMC declined to comment on its lobbying efforts.

Intel

Lobbying spend in 2024: $5.22 million

Top firms: Intel government affairs

Current top lobbyists: Allen Thompson, Eminence Griffin, David Shahoulian, Jordan Haas, Shannon Taylor

CHIPS Act recipient amount: Awarded $7.9 billion on November 26, with $1 billion received by the end of 2024

Top issues: CHIPS and Science Act implementation, environmental permits for chips factories, overseas restrictions of exports and chips trade, US-China relations

For the last decade, Intel has consistently spent more than $3 million lobbying annually. Its $7.08 million efforts in 2022 were likely rewarded when the Department of Commerce announced it would award Intel $8.5 billion to expand its factories across the country.

Former Raytheon government relations director Allen Thompson joined Intel in 2020 to serve as the company's vice president of US-Canada Government Relations. Thompson is a seasoned veteran in securing funding. At Raytheon, he helped secure over $20 million for Navy and aerospace projects. A former Hill staffer, he also worked on tech lobbying projects at Mehlman Consulting and served in the US Coast Guard's intelligence unit.

Intel splits its government affairs advocacy into different focus areas. David Shahoulian oversees workforce policy and brings experience working in general counsel roles for the House Judiciary Committee and the US Department of Homeland Security.

Shannon Taylor, who focuses on technology and manufacturing policy advocacy, worked as counsel for the US House of Representatives on the commerce and energy subcommittees before transitioning to government affairs at the Information Technology Industry Council, a special interest lobbying group for tech companies.

Fellow ITI alum Eminence Griffin, who focuses on public sector relations, worked as a procurement counsel for the House of Representatives and in government affairs at Dell.

Jordan Haas oversees trade policy advocacy, with past work experience at the Office of the US Trade Representative and the Department of Commerce.

Intel did not respond to a request for comment.

AMD

Lobbying spend in 2024: $2.13 million

Top firms: AMD government relations and regulatory affairs, Forbes Tate Partners, Mehlman Consulting

Current top lobbyists: Jonathan Hoganson, Grant Gardner, Sarah Badawi

CHIPS Act recipient amount: N/A

Top issues: CHIPS and Science Act implementation, AI, tax credits, trade and outbound investments

AMD's lobbying spending trickled down to when the company underwent a business model transformation and then increased in 2018 when it pitched in $2.29 million, focusing on legislation related to foreign investment and energy research.

Jonathan Hoganson is AMD's corporate vice president of government relations and regulatory affairs. He previously spearheaded government affairs at Micron and worked under former Democratic Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel.

Grant Gardner is another AMD government relations director who worked at the Department of Commerce. He also holds many Republican Party connections; he was a legislative staff member under former Speaker of the House John Boehner and served as a special projects director for the Republican National Committee during Trump's 2016 election.

Before joining AMD's government relations team, Sarah Badawi served as a senior advisor and national deputy political director for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during his 2020 campaign run. She also planned fundraising events for Elizabeth Warren's senatorial campaign in 2012 and then transitioned to work for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, an organization that supports progressive down-ballot candidates.

AMD did not respond to a request for comment.

Micron

Lobbying spend in 2024: $1.77 million

Top firms: Micron Technology, Crossroads Strategies, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld

Current top lobbyists: Jon Dickinson, Bo Machayo, Jeff Wilson

CHIPS Act recipient amount: $6.1 billion, finalized December 10

Top issues: CHIPS and Science Act implementation, US-Taiwan relations, environmental permits for chips factories, research & development, manufacturing tax credits for semiconductors, US semiconductor competitiveness

In the last three years, Micron has hired Jon Dickinson and Bo Machayo to serve as vice president of global government affairs and head of US government affairs, respectively. Dickinson brings extensive California legislature staffing experience and a decade spent at HP leading government affairs. Machayo previously worked in the Senate, the Department of Homeland Security, and the White House, focusing on the economy, energy, and Africa.

Micron added Jeff Wilson to its DC base this year. Wilson worked for various Republican senators on staff for years before transitioning to government affairs for the aerospace industry.

Micron did not respond to a request for comment.

Samsung

Lobbying spend in 2024: $5.69 million

Top firms: Samsung Electronics America

Current top lobbyists: Jennifer Cetta, Kevin O'Hanlon, Holly Pataki

CHIPS Act recipient amount: $6.4 billion, not yet received

Top issues: electric vehicle policy, CHIPS and Science Act implementation, investment in the US by foreign companies, US-Korea relations

Samsung's Washington lobbying efforts span wider than other chip companies, given that the company is also involved in industries such as telecommunications. Jennifer Cetta is cited at the top of lobbying disclosures. She has served as director and senior counsel of government relations for Samsung for more than a decade.

A Micron government affairs alum, Holly Pataki began working for Samsung in 2022. She also previously worked for the National Republican Congressional Committee, advising fundraising campaign strategies for Republican legislators.

Kevin O'Hanlon began his career working for Democratic House representatives from North Carolina and Ohio before shifting to lobbying for the video games industry.

Samsung did not respond to a request for comment.

Got a tip about these companies? Contact this reporter at [email protected] or use the secure messaging app Signal with the username hliwrites.99.

Editor's note: This list was first published on November 23, 2024, and has been updated to reflect recent developments.