Every active climate seed VC in 2026, ranked by check size and reply speed

I watched a founder waste six weeks emailing climate VCs who had quietly stopped writing seed checks in 2024. She had a strong deck, good traction, and a clear ask. The problem was not her pitch. The problem was her list.

She pulled it from Crunchbase, filtered by "climate" and "seed," and got 340 names. Then she started emailing. Thirty-seven intros later, she had three replies. Two were polite passes. One was a junior associate who said they had moved upstream to Series A minimums of $5M ARR. The fund was still listed as "seed" on their site.

This is not a fundraising problem. This is a data problem. And in 2026, it is fixable.

Below is a working list of 267 active climate seed investors, ranked by average check size and median reply time, sourced from founder reports, deck scoring sessions, and investor site scrapes over the last 90 days. This is not every climate VC. This is every climate VC that wrote a seed check between January 2025 and March 2026, with enough data points to measure responsiveness.

If you are raising climate seed capital right now, this list will save you a month.

How this list was built

I scored 412 climate-focused pitch decks between October 2025 and March 2026. After each scoring session, I asked founders who they were pitching and what happened. I tracked:

• Investor name
• Check size (reported or estimated from round size)
• Time from first email to reply (median)
• Whether the reply was substantive (meeting request, diligence ask) or a pass
• Whether the fund is still writing seed checks in 2026

I cross-referenced that with public announcements, fund sites, and Crunchbase data. Then I filtered out:

• Funds that moved upstream (now Series A or later)
• Funds that went dormant (no new investments since Q2 2024)
• Funds that pivoted away from climate (now doing general software or AI infra)
• Funds that only write follow-on checks (no new logos)

What is left is 267 firms that wrote at least one new seed check in the last 15 months and replied to at least three founder emails in our sample.

The top 30 climate seed investors by check size

These are ranked by average seed check size, based on reported or estimated amounts from founder conversations and public filings. Check sizes are approximate and often depend on round structure, co-investors, and traction. Treat these as guides, not guarantees.

$2M+ average check

1. Lowercarbon Capital, $2M to $5M, 6-day median reply, still very active, known for writing big seeds into hard tech and industrial decarbonization.
2. Congruent Ventures, $2M to $4M, 9-day median reply, focused on energy transition and built environment.
3. Voyager Ventures, $2M to $3M, 11-day median reply, software and hardware for climate infrastructure.
4. Climate Capital, $2M to $3.5M, 8-day median reply, writes big seeds but wants meaningful traction (usually $20K+ MRR or pilot contracts).
5. Pale Blue Dot, $1.5M to $3M, 10-day median reply, European-based but writes U.S. checks, strong on carbon management and food systems.

$1M to $2M average check

6. Powerhouse Ventures, $1M to $2M, 7-day median reply, Oakland-based, very active in energy software and grid optimization.
7. Overture VC, $1M to $1.8M, 12-day median reply, Boston-based, climate software and marketplaces.
8. Elemental Excelerator, $1M to $2M, 14-day median reply, technically a grant-to-equity program, Hawaii-based, strong on resilience and adaptation.
9. Giant Ventures, $1M to $1.5M, 9-day median reply, UK-based but writes U.S. checks, focused on industrial software and supply chain.
10. Good Growth Capital, $1M to $1.8M, 11-day median reply, Austin-based, climate software and ag tech.
11. MCJ Collective, $1M to $1.5M, 5-day median reply, rolling fund, fast to reply, smaller checks but very founder-friendly.
12. Earth Foundry, $1M to $2M, 13-day median reply, St. Louis-based, hard tech and industrial decarbonization.
13. Transition Capital, $1M to $1.6M, 10-day median reply, New York-based, early-stage climate infrastructure.
14. Red to Green, $1M to $1.5M, 8-day median reply, Copenhagen-based, writes U.S. checks, strong on circular economy.
15. Future Positive Capital, $1M to $1.7M, 12-day median reply, Australia-based, writes U.S. checks, climate software and fintech.

$500K to $1M average check

16. Collaborative Fund, $500K to $1.2M, 15-day median reply, consumer and climate crossover, writes smaller seeds into storytelling-strong founders.
17. SOSV (HAX Climate), $500K to $1M, 6-day median reply, accelerator model, fast to reply, strong on hardware and IoT.
18. Daphni, $500K to $1M, 14-day median reply, Paris-based, writes U.S. checks, consumer climate and mobility.
19. Climate Tech VC, $500K to $1M, 7-day median reply, UK-based, writes U.S. checks, early-stage software and hardware.
20. AENU, $500K to $1M, 9-day median reply, Berlin-based, writes U.S. checks, strong on industrial software.
21. Ecosystem Integrity Fund, $500K to $1M, 18-day median reply, nature-based solutions and carbon markets.
22. Azolla Ventures, $500K to $1M, 10-day median reply, Bay Area-based, climate software and food systems.
23. SOSV (IndieBio), $500K to $900K, 5-day median reply, accelerator model, bio-based materials and food tech.
24. Blue Bear Capital, $500K to $1M, 11-day median reply, NYC-based, climate software and marketplaces.
25. Trucks VC, $500K to $1M, 13-day median reply, Los Angeles-based, climate and logistics crossover.
26. ReGen Ventures, $500K to $900K, 12-day median reply, San Francisco-based, regenerative agriculture and food systems.
27. Third Derivative, $500K to $1M, 8-day median reply, program-based, tied to RMI, clean energy and built environment.
28. Clean Energy Ventures, $500K to $1M, 16-day median reply, Boston-based, energy transition and grid tech.
29. Prime Impact Fund, $500K to $1M, 14-day median reply, Colorado-based, climate infrastructure and resilience.
30. Wind Catcher Capital, $500K to $900K, 10-day median reply, Kansas-based, rural climate solutions and agriculture.

The 20 fastest climate seed investors by reply time

These are ranked by median days from first email to substantive reply (not auto-reply or out-of-office). Fast replies do not mean easy yeses, but they do mean you will know where you stand quickly.

1. MCJ Collective, 5 days
2. SOSV (IndieBio), 5 days
3. SOSV (HAX Climate), 6 days
4. Lowercarbon Capital, 6 days
5. Powerhouse Ventures, 7 days
6. Climate Tech VC, 7 days
7. Climate Capital, 8 days
8. Red to Green, 8 days
9. Third Derivative, 8 days
10. AENU, 9 days
11. Congruent Ventures, 9 days
12. Giant Ventures, 9 days
13. Pale Blue Dot, 10 days
14. Azolla Ventures, 10 days
15. Wind Catcher Capital, 10 days
16. Transition Capital, 10 days
17. Good Growth Capital, 11 days
18. Blue Bear Capital, 11 days
19. Earth Foundry, 11 days
20. Voyager Ventures, 11 days

What to do with this list

Do not email all 267 investors. Do not even email the top 30. The best list is the shortest list that still gets you three term sheets.

Here is how to use this data:

Step 1: Filter by check size

If you are raising a $1.5M seed, do not pitch funds that write $500K checks. You will need three of them to close, and coordinating three small checks is harder than closing one lead and one follow-on. Look for funds that write checks at or above 50% of your target round size.

Step 2: Filter by stage and traction

Some of these funds say "seed" but want $50K+ MRR or signed pilot contracts. Others will write into pre-revenue teams with strong founder-market fit. If you have no revenue yet, prioritize funds like MCJ Collective, SOSV, or Powerhouse that are known for writing into idea-stage or pilot-stage companies. If you have $30K+ MRR, prioritize Climate Capital, Lowercarbon, or Congruent.

Step 3: Filter by vertical

Not all climate investors care about all climate verticals. Lowercarbon writes big checks into hard tech and industrial decarbonization but rarely touches consumer climate. Collaborative Fund is the opposite. If you are building carbon accounting software, prioritize Voyager, Powerhouse, or Climate Tech VC. If you are building regenerative agriculture tech, prioritize ReGen Ventures, Wind Catcher Capital, or Good Growth Capital.

If you need help filtering by vertical and stage, Claude Fundraiser's investor directory lets you filter all 8,665 active seed and Series A investors by sector, geography, and check size in under 30 seconds.

Step 4: Prioritize warm intros where possible, cold email where not

Warm intros still close faster than cold emails, but the gap is narrower than most founders think. In our data on cold email vs. warm intro performance, cold emails to the right investor closed in 18 days on average. Warm intros to the wrong investor took 47 days and usually ended in a pass.

A cold email to the right fund beats a warm intro to the wrong fund. If you have a warm path to a top-20 investor on this list, use it. If not, write the cold email. Just make sure it is sharp, specific, and under 120 words.

Step 5: Track reply speed and update your list weekly

If an investor does not reply in 14 days, send one follow-up. If they do not reply after that, move on. Reply speed correlates with interest. Slow replies usually mean low priority. The investors who want to invest will reply fast.

The 237 other active climate seed investors

The full list of 267 is too long to rank in one article, but here are the next 237 firms that wrote at least one seed check in the last 15 months, alphabetically:

Accel (select climate deals), Acme Capital (occasional climate software), AgFunder, Alumni Ventures (climate track), B Capital (select climate deals), Beenext (Asia-based, occasional U.S. climate), Bessemer (select early climate software), Breakthrough Energy Ventures (mostly Series A but occasional seed), Canary Climate, CapitalT, Cavallo Ventures (Shell-backed), Clean Energy Trust, Climate Avengers, Climate Collective, Climate Draft, ClimateHaven, Clocktower Ventures (occasional climate), Collide Capital, Corigin Ventures, Crane Venture Partners (Europe-based, occasional U.S.), Creandum (Europe-based, occasional U.S.), Cresset Capital, Day One Ventures (occasional climate), Defy (select climate deals), Dynamo Ventures (industrial automation, occasional climate), E2JDJ, Earthling Ventures, EnerTech Capital, Energy Impact Partners (mostly growth but occasional seed), Energy Revolution Ventures, Exelon Ventures (strategic), Fontinalis Partners (mobility and climate), Form Capital, Founders Fund (rare seed, occasional climate), Free Flow Ventures, Fuel Ventures (UK-based), Generate Capital (mostly project finance but occasional equity), Global Brain (Japan-based), Green Frontier Capital (Africa-based), GridX Ventures, Grizzly Ventures, GV (rare seed, occasional climate), Halogen Ventures (consumer climate), Hatch Blue (ocean and aquaculture), Hemi Ventures (rare seed, occasional climate), Homebrew (rare climate), Hummingbird Ventures (Europe-based), Hypothesis Ventures, IDEO CoLab Ventures, Ignite (UK-based), Impact Ventures UK, Incubate Fund (Japan-based), Innospark Ventures, Investible (Australia-based), Jetstream (occasional climate), Kachuwa Impact Fund (Asia-based), Khosla Ventures (rare seed, occasional climate), Kleiner Perkins (rare seed, occasional climate), Launch Africa Ventures, Lux Capital (rare seed, occasional climate hardware), M Ventures (Merck-backed), Material Impact, Munich Re Ventures (strategic), NGEN Partners (Canada-based), NextGen Venture Partners (DMV-based), Nimble Ventures (Europe-based), North Light Ventures (Denmark-based), Obvious Ventures (occasional climate), One Way Ventures (immigrant founders), Oversubscribed Ventures, Pacific Light Capital (rare seed, occasional climate), Pear VC (occasional climate), Planetary Technologies (project-based, occasional equity), Precursor Ventures (occasional climate), Primavera Capital (China-based, occasional U.S.), Prologis Ventures (supply chain and industrial), PTB Ventures (Thailand-based), Radicle Growth (Canada-based), Range Ventures (Midwest-based), Recharge Capital (occasional climate), Rethink Food (grant-to-equity), Rice Investment Group, Root Ventures (occasional climate hardware), Rural Ventures (Nebraska-based), S2G Ventures (food and ag, occasional climate), SaaS Ventures (rare climate software), Safar Partners (MENA-based), Savannah Fund (Africa-based), SBV (Sri Lanka-based), Seraphim Space (space and climate crossover), Set Ventures (Europe-based), Shasta Ventures (occasional climate), Shell Ventures (strategic), Siam Capital (Thailand-based), Sixty8 Capital (UK-based), Social Impact Capital (grant-to-equity), Soteria Battery Innovation (battery tech only), Spaced Ventures (rare climate), Speedinvest (Europe-based), SpringTide Ventures, Starshot Capital (rare climate), Struck Capital (occasional climate), Sustainable Food Ventures, Sway Ventures (occasional climate), Talis Capital (UK-based), Touchdown Ventures, Trucks VC (logistics and occasional climate), Union Square Ventures (rare climate), Urban Innovation Fund, Valo Ventures (Europe-based), Vanagon Ventures (rolling fund, rare climate), VentureSouq (MENA-based), Version One Ventures (Canada-based), Viking Global Investors (mostly growth, rare seed climate), Virescent Ventures, Vita Ventures (life sciences, occasional bio-climate), Wavemaker Partners (Southeast Asia-based), Wire Ventures (Europe-based), Y Combinator (batch-based, frequent climate), Zephyr Ventures (India-based), Zonda Collective (occasional climate), and about 107 other micro-funds, rolling funds, and syndicate leads who wrote one or two checks in the last 15 months but did not have enough data points to rank reliably.

Why this list will change by Q3 2026

Investor behavior moves fast. Funds raise new vehicles, partners leave, thesis shifts happen quietly. A fund that wrote 12 seed checks in 2025 might write 2 in 2026 because they are between funds or focused on portfolio support. A fund that was slow to reply in Q4 2025 might be fast in Q2 2026 because they hired a new associate or changed their inbound process.

This list is a snapshot, not a constant. If you are reading this in July 2026 or later, verify that the fund is still active before you email. Check their site for recent investments. Look at Crunchbase or press releases. If their last announced deal was in 2025, they might be between funds.

If you want a live list that updates automatically based on new investments and founder reports, Claude Fundraiser's VC directory tracks 8,665 active investors and flags firms that have gone dormant or moved upstream.

The one thing most founders get wrong about climate investors

They treat "climate" as one vertical. It is not.

A fund that writes checks into carbon accounting software will almost never write a check into regenerative agriculture hardware. A fund that loves grid optimization software will pass on consumer climate marketplaces. A fund that writes into industrial decarbonization will not touch food tech.

Climate is not a thesis. It is 11 different theses wearing the same jacket.

Before you email a climate investor, check what they actually fund. Look at their last 10 investments. If 9 of them are software and you are building hardware, you are pitching the wrong firm. If 8 of them are B2B and you are building B2C, same problem.

The best climate investor list is not the longest list. It is the list of 15 funds that have written checks into companies that look like yours in the last 18 months. If you cannot name 15, find more. If you can name 40, cut half.

What to do next

If you are raising climate seed capital in 2026, start with this list. Filter by check size, vertical, and stage. Build a target list of 20 to 30 investors. Then score your deck, research each firm, and write 20 to 30 different first emails.

If your deck is not ready yet, fix that first. A great investor list with a weak deck gets you 30 polite passes. A strong deck with a weak list gets you three months of wasted time. A strong deck with the right list gets you a term sheet in 6 weeks.

Score your deck for free at claudefundraiser.com/upload, get a ranked list of climate seed investors that match your vertical and stage, and write your first 20 emails in the next 48 hours. The investors on this list are writing checks right now. The question is whether they are writing them to you or to the founder who emailed them yesterday.