Food for thought, and a clever name, but I’m not sure the social good part adds much return. Their own investment, heat pumps, is a good example. If anything they may be guilty of green bias. That is, believing numbers that sound good, and understating practical issues. We’ll see.
The gist of the strategy is that the greatest returns will come from backing companies that satisfy consumer’s self-interest while promoting the broader interest. We want to back companies doing good in the world, but only those a villain would also be interested in.
I think a careful analysis of customer pain is a better way to look at this. I don’t want to get into the weeds about energy costs and tax credits here, but there is a lot of history there.