Here’s how our climate team picked 10 promising companies to watch

What is the “Climate Tech Companies to Watch” list, and what kind of companies does it highlight?

The “Climate Tech Companies to Watch” list is MIT Technology Review’s annual selection of promising businesses. This year’s edition names 10 companies. The list matters because it spotlights practical technologies addressing climate change, rather than treating technology alone as a complete solution.

The companies cover two broad goals. Some reduce the emissions driving global warming. Others help communities face extreme heat, drought, floods, and other effects of a warming planet. The group spans batteries, wind power, flood protection, nuclear reactors, and more.

MIT Technology Review looks for companies with an established track record. That record can include research findings, money raised, or real-world deployments. The final group also represents different industries, countries, and stages of development. Together, the companies show how varied climate innovation has become.

How many companies were selected, and how broad was the group of nominees considered?

MIT Technology Review selected 10 companies for this year’s Climate Tech Companies to Watch list. That small final group came from a much broader pool of dozens of climate-tech companies around the world. The process was designed to find strong candidates, not simply the most familiar names.

The search began with nominations from MIT Technology Review reporters and editors. The team also asked outside experts for suggestions. Academics, researchers, investors, and analysts contributed ideas, creating a wide network of potential nominees across technologies and regions.

After collecting names, the team investigated each company’s technology and business. It reviewed literature, reports, and patents before making decisions. The final slate was also shaped by balance: it needed varied industries, global representation, different development stages, returning companies, new names, and important current trends.

How did MIT Technology Review evaluate nominees for technological impact, scalability, and commercial progress?

MIT Technology Review evaluated nominees on potential impact, scalability, and signs of commercial progress. The team studied both the technology and the business behind it. This matters because a useful invention must also be capable of expanding and operating outside the laboratory.

Reporters and editors dug through scientific literature, industry reports, and patents. They looked for evidence supporting the technology’s claims. They also considered a company’s track record, including research findings, capital raised, and deployments. These signals helped separate developing businesses from purely speculative ideas.

The decision was not based only on individual performance. Editors considered how each nominee fit the full list. They sought a spread of industries, countries, development stages, returning companies, and new names. Major trends, including growing electricity demand from artificial-intelligence data centers, also influenced the final choices.

What evidence can show that a climate-tech company has moved beyond an idea toward real-world use?

Climate-tech companies can show progress beyond an idea through an established track record. The article identifies three especially useful signals: research findings, capital raised, and deployments. Together, they suggest that a company has tested its concept, attracted support, or put technology into use.

For example, a deployed energy-storage system provides stronger evidence than a design that exists only on paper. Funding can show that investors see commercial potential, while research findings can provide technical support. Patents and published literature add more evidence about how the technology works and what is new about it.

These signals do not guarantee success. They help reviewers judge technological promise, scalability, and commercial progress. MIT Technology Review examined such evidence while also reviewing each company’s business and overall place in the list. The approach favors companies already moving toward practical climate impact.

Why have China and companies outside the United States become more prominent in this year’s climate-tech list?

Companies outside the United States are more prominent this year because US political changes have weakened climate-tech support. The article points to the dismantling of federal regulations and cuts to financial incentives for innovation. It says these shifts mean the US is no longer a leader in climate tech.

China stands out as an innovation center, especially in energy and climate. Two companies on the list illustrate that momentum. WeLion is developing semi-solid-state batteries for electric vehicles. Envision Energy is installing large amounts of wind power and energy storage in China and internationally.

The broader result is a 2026 list largely composed of companies based outside the US. This reflects changing political and financial conditions, not a lack of climate need. Electricity demand, renewable deployment, and storage needs continue to grow. Companies in countries still building these markets may therefore gain greater visibility.

What happens to electricity grids when demand rises and renewable power varies with weather, and how can energy storage help?

Electricity grids must balance supply and demand continuously. Demand is rising, partly because of artificial-intelligence data centers. At the same time, renewable sources such as wind and solar do not produce a constant amount of electricity. Their output changes with weather and time, making grid management harder.

Energy storage helps by shifting electricity through time. It can store surplus power when renewable generation is high, then release that energy when production falls or demand rises. This smooths variations in supply and makes it easier for grids to add more renewable power without sacrificing reliability.

The article highlights several storage approaches. Energy Dome uses compressed carbon dioxide for long-duration grid storage. Moment Energy repurposes electric-vehicle batteries for grid-scale systems. Form Energy produces iron-based batteries designed to store energy for multiple days. These technologies address different storage needs as electricity use grows.

What are greenhouse gases, and how does reducing their emissions help limit climate change?

Greenhouse gases are atmospheric gases that absorb and re-radiate heat. This natural greenhouse effect makes Earth habitable, but human activities have increased concentrations of gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. The added gases trap more heat, raising global temperatures and changing climate patterns.

Reducing emissions limits the amount of additional heat entering the climate system. Burning less fossil fuel, improving energy efficiency, protecting forests, and using cleaner energy can all reduce greenhouse-gas output. Technologies that store renewable electricity or replace high-emission processes can support those efforts.

The article connects emissions with consequences already affecting communities. Wildfires, floods, and other climate-fueled disasters are killing thousands and costing billions of dollars. Cutting emissions cannot erase existing impacts immediately, but it can reduce future warming and risks. Adaptation technologies remain important because some climate effects will continue.

Key Facts:

📌 The 2026 list features 10 climate-tech companies.

📌 Companies target emissions reduction or climate adaptation.

📌 Featured technologies span batteries, wind, floods, and nuclear power.

📌 Ten companies were selected for the final 2026 list.

📌 The team evaluated dozens of nominees from around the world.

📌 Nominations came from journalists and outside climate experts.

📌 Evaluation covered impact, scalability, and commercial progress.