In this episode, we speak with Nancy Floyd, the founder and managing director of the venture capital firm Nth Power and a new member of Hannon Armstrong’s Board of Directors. Throughout the conversation, Nancy offers several insights on the past, present, and future of the clean energy venture space. She also provides plainspoken advice on effective board service, what makes a good pitch, and a good business plan from the perspective of someone who reads thousands a year. Additionally, Nancy talked with Gil about her time in the political spotlight, how the traits she developed in competitive ski racing and tennis help her in the venture world, and much more. We hope you enjoy this conversation with one of the true pioneers of climate tech investing.
In this episode, we speak with Nancy Floyd, the founder and managing director of the venture capital firm Nth Power and a new member of Hannon Armstrong’s Board of Directors. Throughout the conversation, Nancy offers several insights on the past, present, and future of the clean energy venture space. She also provides plainspoken advice on effective board service, what makes a good pitch, and a good business plan from the perspective of someone who reads thousands a year. Additionally, Nancy talked with Gil about her time in the political spotlight, how the traits she developed in competitive ski racing and tennis help her in the venture world, and much more. We hope you enjoy this conversation with one of the true pioneers of climate tech investing.
Links:
2008 Democratic National Convention speech by Nancy Floyd
Hannon Armstrong Appoints Clarence D. Armbrister and Nancy C. Floyd to Board of Directors
Episode recorded June 2, 2021.
Nancy Floyd: I would never be in any other type of venture capital. I have this very strong altruistic streak and that's been important to me that I follow that. I'm here, yes, to make money for my investors, but I wouldn't have done software or semiconductors just to be in the venture capital world. I wanted to do clean energy and it's been so satisfying.
Chad Reed: Welcome to episode five of Climate Positive, a podcast produced by Hannon Armstrong, a leading investor in climate solutions. I'm Gil Jenkins
Hilary Langer: I'm Hilary Langer.
Chad Reed: I’m Chad Reed
Chad: In this series, we strive for candid conversations with the leaders, innovators, and changemakers who are driving a climate positive future
For this episode, we spoke with the wise and wonderful Nancy Floyd, who is the Founder and MD of the venture capital firm Nth Power, and also a new member Hannon Armstrong’s Board of Directors.
Throughout our chat, Nancy offers a number of insights on the cleantech venture space’s past, present and future. She offers plainspoken advice on topics like effective board service, what makes a good pitch, and a good business plan from the perspective of someone who reads thousands of those a year. Nancy and I also made time to talk about the political arena, how the traits shed developed in competitive ski racing and tennis help her in the venture world, and much much more.
Her passion for clean energy is infectious, and that’s no doubt why she has been such a great leader in what we now refer to as climate tech investing. With that, here my conversation with Nancy Floyd.
Gil Jenkins: Welcome to Climate Positive, Nancy.
Nancy Floyd: Thank you so much for having me.
Gil Jenkins: It’s great to have to on. So let’s start with a little bit about Nth Power, which you founded as one of the first venture capital firms focus on clean energy way back in 1993.
What compelled you to do that? What's kept you going as the landscape has changed so much over the years?
Nancy Floyd: The idea for Nth Power actually came when I was part of the founding team of a company on the unregulated side of Pacific Telesis as it's one of the big telecom companies. It was at the point of deregulation of the telecommunications industry. I had run a company before, the CEO of Pacific Telesis had me sit through all of these meetings of what businesses should we go into on the unregulated side of our business. I saw the difference that technology made actually in disrupting the landscape.
This was not technology that was developed by Bell Labs from inside the big telecommunications companies. These were little companies that were getting funded through friends and family and the venture business was young but it was still there. I thought, boy, if there's an industry that really needs new technology, it's the energy industry because up until then, all of my experience had been working with utilities and then I became a wind developer so energy is what I really knew the best. That was in like '85 and '86.
It took until 93 when I was running I started a technology practice for utility consulting firm that the time seemed right. There had been federal legislation passed that further deregulated the electric utility industry. I had hired somebody who was a real technologist, a guy by the name of Maurice Gunderson. He and I decided that we were going to start a fund because we were already doing work for utilities to help them find technologies that they were concerned were going to disrupt their business. We decided let's not be on the side of the utilities, let's be on the side of the little companies because they're the ones that really needed funding.
We actually had to buy the practice. I started from this utility consulting firm, we went out to raise our first fund and let me tell you, it was not for the faint of heart. We visited 197 investors around the world. We counted it and nine signed up. We raised $65 million which is small but ended up being very impactful but it took us three years with no pay. Out of that fund, we invested in 14 companies, we had four IPOs, two M&A transactions. It was a very successful fund.
The next fundraise for the second fund was a lot easier, still not easy but a lot easier because it was still a very young category. The thesis behind investing in, we called it then new energy technologies, which then became clean technologies, which has now become climate technology has really changed radically. In the '90s, it was all about utility deregulation and utilities were looking for market differentiating products and services, and no surprise, out of the nine investors that we had, eight of them were strategic investors which included electricity to France, included Duke energy.
It included one pension fund which was the national pension fund of Sweden because they had already been through deregulation of the electric utility industry. They saw the opportunities that were coming out of deregulation. Then you move into the 2000s with our second fund and it was all about energy supply. This is when big generalist funds jumped in to invest in this sector. They saw that there were 3 billion people in the world that didn't have access to modern energy. Big market opportunity, deep technology, and most of the money, two-thirds of the money went either next-generation solar or biofuels.
That lasted about a decade. Then there was a brief moment of focus on customers getting engaged with energy. You saw a lot of investment in smart devices like thermostats, customer engagement portals but then that has now led into this next wave of climate tech which I think is terrific because climate wasn't even part of the discussion in the nineties or really even in the early 2000s. Now this next wave is, in my mind, the perfect time we started a fund.
I've congratulated a number of founders of new funds who happened to have been associates at cleantech funds in the 2000s, I knew them, in some cases mentored them. He said, congratulations, they've raised big amounts of money. I said, gee, I wish I was founding Nth Power now instead of 29 years ago, because there's no turning back. It's the perfect time.
Gil Jenkins: You were taking a leap of faith. I think I read somewhere that was there, like maybe 50 million invested in what you call clean energy around that time. Then what is it today roughly?
Nancy Floyd: It's gone up and down. We went from less than 50 million being invested in the early '90s to it peaked at a billion dollars in '99, 2000. Then it peaked again at $11 billion in like 2009, 2010. It dipped a little bit. I actually don't know what the number is now with these new funds, but at one point, it was one of the largest sectors in venture capital.
Gil Jenkins: Maybe 2008 through 2011.
Nancy Floyd: Exactly.
Gil Jenkins: I have to ask you this as a communicator, the semantics. You said it was new energy tech before then clean tech into the late '90s and 2000s, green tech as well, maybe clean web in between. Now we're squarely in climate tech. Do you think that evolution in semantics is an intentional, do any of these terms that are still interchangeable use carry a headache with them, or is any of this matter in the grand scheme of things?
Nancy Floyd: Well, it definitely matters, messaging definitely matters. I think, well, first of all there were a lot of failures in this period in the mid-2000s where people were investing in next-generation solar and biofuels and it brought a bad name to cleantech. Many of these investments were very capital intensive, required hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. I would argue that's not a venture capital deal, but the reason they required so much money is that they needed to use venture capital, build out their manufacturing plans, and probably half of these big deals failed outright.
A lot of the big generalist funds who jumped into cleantech or green tech pulled out. I think cleantech got out a very bad name. Climate tech, it sends a very important message that, in fact, our focus is on climate, that climate is the market driver, and I think investors are interested in putting their money behind climate-focused funds. There's been a big surge of interest.
Gil Jenkins: I think you referenced it briefly, but could you share with our listeners your formative entrepreneurial experience, founding NFC energy in the '80s, which was one of the first wind development firms
Nancy Floyd: It’s an interesting story. I was not prepared to be an entrepreneur. I was recruited to come join a group of guys that were in real estate that had leased some land in Altamont Pass. I moved from the East coast to San Francisco, not knowing a soul in 1982. I quickly, because I started my career as a regulator, so I understood regulation. I fairly quickly, and I say quickly over nine months, negotiated the first, what they call non-standard contract with [unintelligible 00:09:26] power from our wind farms.
It was worth millions of dollars. It ultimately became the standard. They called it standard offer Number four. It was a very favorable contract for wind. I realized at the time, during that nine months, that my partners who had significant real estate holdings weren't funding the company properly. We also didn't see eye-to-eye frankly on business values. I went back East, I raised a couple of hundred thousand dollars, bought them out, and there I was, CEO of a company, not even knowing how to budget, how to forecast. I just was a sponge. Took help where I could.
We ultimately developed $30 million worth of wind farms, vertical access. I chose the vertical access wind turbines for a reason. I thought that was a very good choice at the time. I mean, it was definitely plowing new ground. I was literally out in the Hills with rattlesnake guards that my farmers gave me because I didn't realize there were rattlesnakes out there, nor did I realize as I was digging the anemometer controls out of the ground, that there were scorpions were and doing everything, going before the planning commissions to get wind turbines permitted. They were afraid that if these turbines were along a major freeway, were they going to distract drivers.
Anyway, it was really cowboy days, but we ultimately developed $30 million worth of wind farms. I ended up selling the company to a much larger developer in 1985. I saw that the tax credits were expiring, and to stay in business, I would have to be vertically integrated, meaning I would have to manufacture wind turbines and I wasn't prepared to do that, but I did very well. I generated, I say 25 times invested capital, but actually, it was a lot more than that.
Gil Jenkins: When you see the wind industry today, are you amazed at the scale, or was it what you always expected?
Nancy Floyd: No, I couldn't have imagined. I forget what the size was. Maybe it was a hundred kilowatts. It was the Westinghouse early what they called the Mod-1, but I can not believe these turbines, and they're so beautiful. They're just beautiful. I'm also getting very excited about the potential for offshore wind, because obviously there you've got steadier winds, it's more baseload power, and I'm amazed. I never could have imagined. These were 30-kilowatt machines.
Gil Jenkins: Wow, I want to turn a little bit too, I think by my account and correct me if I'm wrong, you've served on more than a dozen private company boards, at least half a dozen non-profit boards, and five public company boards, at least including Hannon Armstrong, which we're thrilled that you joined earlier this year. That's a lot of board experience. Are there lessons learned on effective board service from that rich experience over the years? In talking about that, could you also share your perspective on the critical importance of diversity in the boardroom?
Nancy Floyd: Being on a public company board is very different than being on a private company board or a nonprofit board. My private company board experience has been largely where I've been a major investor in the company, and you really get very granular in terms of strategy and financings. I'm chairman of one of my boards right now, where I'm literally on the phone with the CEO every single day.
That is not the case with a public company board. It really took me a year to learn this. I think the first rule is to listen and learn because it does take a long time to understand the business, to understand the dynamics of the board, to understand the corporate culture and our role is not to micromanage. Our role is not to manage in any way. Our role is to govern, and that's very different. That's a level up above from the kind of board service I did on my non-profit and private company boards. My lessons learned are, listen and learn, over-prepare, really read your board materials carefully. These board materials are very lengthy. I forget--
Gil Jenkins: 400 pages?
Nancy Floyd: 400 pages and they could be longer. Some of my board books were up to 800 pages. Then add value with every comment that you make. Don't just try to take up air time. In terms of diversity on boards. When I went on the board of WGL Holdings, which was the holding company for Washington Gas, the natural gas utility that serves DC, Virginia, and Maryland, was very interesting. I loved that board. I actually enjoyed being on that company board. I was recruited for a very specific reason.
The company wanted to invest a hundred million dollars a year over five years, so 500 million to build a clean energy portfolio and they wanted somebody with my background. In fact, I was the first director in its 120-year life that didn't live in their service territory. When I went on the board, I was the second woman. By the time I transitioned off the board, almost 10 years later, there were four women and three people of color. The conversation changed so dramatically from being clubby and I don't mean that disrespectfully, but kind of clubby to being much more thoughtful.
You could see the difference that diverse backgrounds, in opinions brought to the board. I think we were just a much more effective board. In fact, we did win a lot of awards for diversity, our stock performed extremely well. I know lots of studies have tied for diversity to stock performance. I don't know that it's how directly it's tied to except that you've got a diversity of opinions that you're expressing in front of management. It makes a big difference. I'm thrilled that we have diversity on hand and Armstrong board. I'm very proud of that.
Gil Jenkins: I read that you read about 1000 business plans a year. What did the best ones have in common?
Nancy Floyd: The best ones and let me say, sometimes, you spend five minutes on a business plan, and you put it in the past pile. What the best business plan to have is a very compelling and succinct executive summary. Then the second thing that we look at his management team. Based on that, we'll either put it in a pile, that is a pass, or we'll put it in the pile that says we're going to read more. Every business plan has that and management, by the way, is the most important section. Lots of people said this before, but I'll repeat this, I'd rather have a B plus idea and an A management team than an A-rated idea and a B plus management team. Management is just critical to success.
Gil Jenkins: I think I also read that you really get into the psychology in the pitch with how the CEO acts or the founder acts with others. Can you talk a little bit about that?
Nancy Floyd: Oh, it's so interesting. We bring a company in to pitch us and it's very interesting to watch the dynamic of the team, the pitching companies team and the dynamic between that team and us. If you have a company that comes in, you've got the CEO, and maybe you've got the CTO and one other, if the CEO does all the talking, that's a red flag for sure. I've had a CEO where I asked a difficult question, literally leap across the board table, to try to almost throw it around.
I am not exaggerating. You're also trying to see, that was an extreme case. You're trying to see if you can really work with these people. By the way, I also tell companies that come into pitch, that not only are we diligence in them, they should diligence us, because a company's board is very important, whether you're a private company, or a public company, and the dynamic between the board and management team is really critical. If that dynamic isn't working, it's not a pretty picture. It's not healthy for the company.
Gil Jenkins: Let's crystal ball here a bit. I looked at the list of all the technologies of the companies you've invested in, and it's a long one.What is most exciting to you right now from a cleantech standpoint and are there any related trends to that, that you're anticipating over the next five years, let's say to 2030?
Nancy Floyd: The areas that I find interesting are obviously there's a lot of continued work and energy storage, which is critical. It's critical for electric vehicles, it's critical for having solar and storage at your home. There's a lot of work going on there. There's a lot of work going on in carbon capture. Obviously, there's a lot of work going on in the area of mobility. Then in clean materials. If I clean materials, we're talking about as companies have made these pledges to be carbon net neutral. They have to look into their supply chain. They have to look at how their products are made.
Whether their products are made from recycled materials, whether they are materials that actually can be used for carbon capture, I think the clean materials area is a bit of a sleeper one that we actually invested in, in our fourth fund and we made three investments. One, we lost all of our money, and two, we got our money back and some, but it was just too early. People didn't really care. I think the time is right for that.
Gil Jenkins: In preparation for the show you told me that you're both a competitive downhill ski racer-
[crosstalk]
Equally, ferocious tennis player. What do you think is true in both of those sports that you hold dear and how you think about your approach to Venture Capital investing?
Nancy Floyd: Well, both sports are individual sports, but there's definitely a team element particularly in tennis. I was captain of my high school and college tennis teams. Of course, in tennis, you can play doubles. As captain, I really try to I guess that was one of my first leadership tests. It was trying to really create a team spirit and I'll just tell you a funny story. My last year in college, I had started the tennis team actually at college because I was one of the first women's classes.
I raised money to go do a tour during spring break. We played University of Virginia, Duke William, and Mary, some really great university of North Carolina. Big colleges top tier tennis teams and we lost every single match. What I thought was going to really bring our game up could have really brought us down. In fact, we used it as a real learning experience and our skills actually did come up as a result of playing those really top-tier teams.
Back to your question about how it applies to venture. They're both individual sports and skiing, in particular, the pressure is all on you, but there's a lot of feel to the sport and where I view venture as very much a team activity. It's a team within your Venture Capital firm because inevitably all of your companies are going to hit a speed bump along the way. You're looking to your partners for advice on how to help them over that speed bump. It's really a relationship business in one where you have to feel your way through the situation.
In skiing, it's a lot about making decisions literally on the fly and you may be literally on the fly. While it's not obvious that as individual sports it applies to what I view as a team profession in venture, there are elements that do apply to venture, the ability to pivot, the ability to make really quick decisions.
Gil Jenkins: What about risk?
[crosstalk]
Nancy Floyd: Oh, well, that's true. Oh, my gosh. For skiing, the risk. Absolutely. You're literally on the verge of being out of control if you're going to be good and literally, you win by hundreds of a second. It's pretty amazing sport.
Gil Jenkins: Let's talk about the political arena. You had certainly an incredible opportunity to speak at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver. What was it like to talk to 20,000 people in a hall about the clean energy economy, and I'm certainly millions more on TV?
Nancy Floyd: Well, let me say it was surreal. It was exciting. There were some elements of my speaking that made it really special. First, I got a phone call a week before I was going to speak that asked if I would speak on clean energy and the economy, not much time to prep. I asked a couple of questions. I was going to be teamed with Al Gore's former speechwriter. I said, well, I will only do this if I can speak in my words because I'm not a politician and they agreed to that. I sent in a draft, I had four minutes, by the way, Bill Clinton had five minutes. I also spoke in Prime Time.
Gil Jenkins: Prime Time, a few speakers before Hillary, too, right?
Nancy Floyd: Before Hillary, right. We went back and forth on this four-minute speech which was going to be put into a teleprompter. I arrive the morning of the speech, I had to go to training and they're going to train me to use a teleprompter. I'd never used a teleprompter before and there was a speechwriter and there was this crusty old guy from Boston and I grew up in Boston, who was going to teach me how to use the teleprompter.
You can use the teleprompter standing if you're just looking straight at it but then there is a trick to turning to the side, which I never perfected. Anyway, they had loaded the old version of my speech in, and thank goodness, I brought the new version of my speech. They wanted me say things like they wanted to reference Nixon, which said, that's a downer, where they wanted me to talk about him.
Gil Jenkins: They wanted you to talk about Nixon?
Nancy Floyd: Yes. Well, they wanted me to bash him or bash Bush, and talk about Oil sheiks. I said, "No." We had agreed on this new wording. Finally, I got them to put the new wording in. Then the appointed hour, I was escorted underneath the, in the what they call the waiting room, or the green room where they do hair and makeup and all that. I have been told, by the way, that when you get out there, most of the delegates will not be paying attention, and that what you're really doing is not talking to 20,000 delegates in the convention center, you're going to be talking to the 10 million people who are watching it on television.
The couple of hints they give you is, don't try to talk above the din in the convention hall, because, otherwise, you'll be viewed as screeching to the television audience. Then, also, I had to limit my gestures to like, you could imagine just a square, I can't raise my hand or my fist because that meant I was like a candidate, I couldn't outstretch my arms, because they said the cameras would cut off the end [chuckles] of my hands. I had very limited movements that I could do. Obviously, I'm a little nervous. This is the biggest audience I've ever spoken to, meaning television audience.
I had done some live television but walking out there, it was amazing. I just was walking out and there's Wolf Blitzer, here's Brian Williams. I just had this moment of calm and I just delivered the speech. They were right, for about the first half of the speech, nobody was really listening but by the second half of the speech, they were actually paying attention. Four minutes went by very, very quickly, but it was exciting. It was surreal and the end is when I walked off, I had all these texts but the first thing I did was I called my boys and my youngest one said, "Mom, I know where I get my acting skills from." My oldest, I said, "How did I do?" He said, [unintelligible 00:27:38]
Gil Jenkins: Staying in the political arena for a moment… what do you think they get wrong about clean energy?
Nancy Floyd: What they get wrong, time after time, is that they think that a transition to a new energy economy is going to cause us to lose jobs, as opposed to seeing the job creation opportunity that it is. It has been, and I think one of the reasons that the politicians are coming around is they have seen the number of clean energy jobs that have been created, and they're good-paying jobs. Now, obviously, we have an administration in office that views climate as economic risk, it's a climate forward administration, in both Biden's economic team, energy team, the political climate is much more favorable.
Hopefully, we're going to get some favorable legislation out of this but time and time again, I think they've been stuck in their ways and even still, "We're going to lose those coal jobs." Well, guess what, there are a lot of good jobs that replace the coal jobs. Goes back to the old analogy of, if you're still in the [unintelligible 00:29:21] You got to move along and it's proven, State of California has created a lot of jobs. Oregon, I think, created 130,000 clean energy jobs. It's just going to grow.
Gil Jenkins: Do you think sometimes though, there's a trap to just talk about, "We love wind and solar and wind and solar jobs and fastest-growing occupations, no question hundreds of thousands of people," but when you think of the 3 million clean energy jobs, a lot of those are energy efficiency jobs, electrician, and, I sometimes when I hear the rhetoric, which I think is important and effective, I wish they would mention those electrician blue-collar jobs as well.
Nancy Floyd: Absolutely. There are a lot of blue-collar jobs. Probably more blue-collar jobs and others. Because obviously, you have also electricians for wind projects and solar projects. It's created also a lot of small businesses. We're putting some new solar on our roof and I didn't go to the big guys. The best solar installers that I interviewed were former roofing companies or they're roofing companies and solar. These are companies that have added to their product line. It's blue-collar jobs. It's the growth of small business. It's a great opportunity across the board.
Gil Jenkins: When you're talking to young people today and clearly, this generation, anyone under 35, it's clear there's a real passion for clean energy and climate solutions broadly. What do you tell those folks who want to get in the field?
Nancy Floyd: I tell them, first of all, my career has been the most exciting unplanned career that I could imagine. The bulk of it's been in clean energy. That there are jobs for every interest. Whether you're in marketing and communications. Whether you're in research. Whether you're an engineer. It is a growing field. This is not a dying field. You just don't know where your career is going to take you because it is constantly changing and growing. It's also a career where you can make an impact. There's nothing more satisfying.
It's what's made me. I would never tell my investors this. I would never be in any other type of venture capital. I have this very strong altruistic streak and that's been important to me that I follow that. I'm here, yes, to make money for my investors, but I wouldn't have done software or semiconductors just to be in the venture capital world. I wanted to do clean energy and it's been so satisfying.
Gil Jenkins: That really resonates with me, well said, Nancy. So we’re almost done her but we have tradition Climate Positive where we like to ask our guest a series of rapid fire lighting round questions. Since these are candid conservations with a climate theme, we call this the hot seat..
For the first question, I’ll ask to you to fill in the blank on the following statement.
The most important advice you've followed was?
Nancy Floyd: Humility. Be respectful. Look for the best in everyone.
Gil Jenkins: The most important advice or feedback you've rejected?
Nancy Floyd: Sell yourself. Be larger than life.
Gil Jenkins: There are a few of those types in the venture on Sand Hill Road, right?
Nancy Floyd: Yes, there are.
Gil Jenkins: [laughs] These next few are agree or disagree. Bitcoin incentivizes renewable energy?
Nancy Floyd: It should. Not yet but it should.
Gil Jenkins: Carbon offsets are a distraction from the real business of cutting emissions?
Nancy Floyd: Yes.
Gil Jenkins: Why?
Nancy Floyd: I think it gives companies the opportunity to meet their pledges without doing the hard work.
Gil Jenkins: Awesome. Overrated or underrated? I have many technologies I'm just going to rip through here. Hopefully, I don't get you in trouble if you're invested in any of these or are considering. Overrated or underrated? Green hydrogen?
Nancy Floyd: Underrated?
Gil Jenkins: Carbon capture and storage?
Nancy Floyd: Underrated.
Gil Jenkins: Advanced small modular reactors or SMRs?
Nancy Floyd: I'm going to have to say underrated because we need all of this.
Gil Jenkins: Concentrated solar power?
Nancy Floyd: Underrated.
Gil Jenkins: Solar pavement roadways?
Nancy Floyd: Overrated.
Gil Jenkins: Waste-to-energy?
Nancy Floyd: Underrated.
Gil Jenkins: Distributed wind?
Nancy Floyd: Underrated.
Gil Jenkins: Tidal energy?
Nancy Floyd: Underrated.
Gil Jenkins: Which one did I forget? Certainly, clean materials, right?
Nancy Floyd: Clean materials, underrated.
Gil Jenkins: You split your time between San Francisco and Oregon. Which state has the better produce?
Nancy Floyd: I would say Oregon. Right now I'm in Oregon and we are in the very short three-week season of Oregon strawberries which are-
Gil Jenkins: The best.
Nancy Floyd: -the small super sweet especially the food variety, and they are so fragile, they last about two days once you've bought them, and they are amazing.
Gil Jenkins: OK last one, Nancy. Another finish the sentence
“to me, Climate positive means…”
Nancy Floyd: For me, it's more from maybe a technology perspective. It is solar on every feasible roof and lots of offshore wind.
Gil Jenkins: Sounds good to me. Nancy, thank you for doing this for coming on Climate Positive. It was really fun to talk to fellow Oregonian and new awesome board member. When I first got into cleantech around 2008-9, I knew you by reputation, I was in San Francisco so I followed your career with great interest. Thank you for being such a great leader and risk-taker and kind soul. It's been really nice to get to know you a little bit better through our podcasts.
Nancy Floyd: Thanks so much.
Chad: Climate Positive is produced by Hannon Armstrong and David Benjamin Sound. If you like what you heard today, please share the show with friend, leave a comment and a rating on our show.
You can send us show and guest ideas by tweeting at us @HannonArmstrong or via email at climatepositive@hannonarmstrong.com
I'm Chad Reed. And this is Climate Positive.