Industry Research 1

'327869'8-328)',
)\EQMRMRKLS[XLIQYPXMXVMPPMSRHSPPEVGSRWXVYGXMSRMRHYWXV]MWFIMRK
VIWLETIHF]XIGLRSPSK]
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL
8LIXIGLRSPSK]QEVOIX
MRXIPPMKIRGITPEXJSVQ
'&-RWMKLXWWSJX[EVIPIXW]SYTVIHMGXHMWGYWWERH
GSQQYRMGEXIIQIVKMRKXIGLRSPSK]XVIRHWYWMRKHEXE
MR[E]WXLEXEVIFI]SRHLYQERGSKRMXMSR
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ
%*);3*396,%44='97831)67
8LIQSWXTYFPMGP]VIJIVIRGIEFPIGYWXSQIVWSJER]SRIMRXLIMRHYWXV]
“Think of the fundamental value chain of venture

capital … If we play the clock forward, the finding
ERHEWWIWWMRKSJMRZIWXQIRXW[MPPFIEPQSWXIRXMVIP]
HSRIF]XIGLRSPSK]RSXLYQERFIMRKW%RHXLI
GSQTER]XLEXMWXSHE]TSWMXMSRIHXSFIXLIQEVOIX
PIEHIVMRXLEXIZSPYXMSRMW'&-RWMKLXW
4EX+VEH]
7IUYSME'ETMXEP4EVXRIV
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7II[LEXSXLIVGYWXSQIVWLEZIXSWE]EXLXXT[[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQGYWXSQIVPSZI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

%&3988,)0)%(%2%0=78
2MOLMP/VMWLRER
6IWIEVGL%REP]WX'&-RWMKLXW
*SGYWIWSR,IEPXLGEVI'SRWYQIV4EGOEKIH+SSHW-RHYWXVMEPW
ERH:'8VIRHW
4YFPMWLIHVIWIEVGLERHHEXEEREP]WMWLEZIFIIRJIEXYVIHMR8LI
2I[=SVO8MQIW;EPP7XVIIX.SYVREP*MRERGMEP8MQIW&PSSQFIVK
ERH'2&'EQSRKSXLIVQENSVQIHMESYXPIXW $RMOMPPMRMX
+VEHYEXISJ'SPYQFME9RMZIVWMX]
ROVMWLRER$GFMRWMKLXWGSQ
8%&0)3*'328)287
;LEX-W'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL#
1EGVS8VIRHW
4VMZEXI1EVOIX%GXMZMX]
6SPI3J'SVTSVEXIW
'EXIVTMPPEV'EWI7XYH]
&YWMRIWW1SHIPW%TTVSEGLIWERH8VIRHW
)QIVKMRK8IGLRSPSKMIW
;LEXEVI[IEREP]^MRKMR
'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL#
We’ll be analyzing how private companies are

GLERKMRKXLIHIWMKRTVSGIWWERHI\IGYXMSRSJ
GSRWXVYGXMSRTVSNIGXW
4VMZEXIQEVOIXJYRHMRKHEXE[MPPFIJSGYWIHSR
GSQTERMIWXLEXYWIXIGLRSPSK]EWEOI]HMJJIVIRXMEXMRK
TSMRX[LIVIGSRWXVYGXMSRMWXLITVMQEV]YWIGEWI
'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL
1%'6386)2(7
-2*6%7869'896)-28,)74380-+,8
TRUMP INDICATES HE’S SERIOUS ON
-2*6%7869'896)74)2(-2+
2SZIQFIV
'327869'8-3274)2(,%76)&392()(
7TIRHMRXSGSRWXVYGXMSRLEWVIFSYRHIHXSTVIVIGIWWMSRLMKLW
LMXXMRKXVMPPMSRPIZIPWMR
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL *6)( [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

'327869'8-3292)1403=1)28%803;77-+2%07
4377-&0)0%&367,368%+)
Construction is expected to see a boom, yet we’re already seeing record lows of YRIQTPS]QIRXMR
GSRWXVYGXMSR8LMWGSYPHWYKKIWXEPEFSVWLSVXEKIMRXLIGSRWXVYGXMSRQEVOIX
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL *6)( [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

'327869'8-32-732)
3*8,)0)%78
(-+-8->)(7)'8367
'SRWXVYGXMSRMWXS[EVHW
XLIFSXXSQ[LIRMX
GSQIWXSHMKMXMÊXMSR
[MXLSRP]EKVMGYPXYVIERH
LYRXMRKJEPPMRKFIRIEXLMX
1ER]SJXLIWIEVIEWEVI
PIWWGSQTPI\ERHGSYPH
VIHYGIXLIGSWXSJ
WIVZMGIWMJEYXSQEXIH
IKXVERWEGXMSRW
FYWMRIWWTVSGIWWIW
IXG
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 1G/MRWI] [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

“When we look at all industries and sectors, by and
PEVKIIZIV]SRILEWJMKYVIHSYXLS[XSYWIWSJX[EVI
ERHGSQTYXMRKTS[IVXSFIQSVIIJJIGXMZI;LIR
]SYPSSOEXGSRWXVYGXMSR[IVIWTIRHMRKPIWWXLER
SJVIZIRYIWSRWSJX[EVI[LMPISYVGSYRXIVTEVXWMR
EIVSWTEGIERHQERYJEGXYVMRKEVIWTIRHMRKGPSWIVXS
XS 3ZIVXLIPEWX]IEVWIZIV]SRIIPWILEW
JMKYVIHSYXLS[XSFIX[MGIEWTVSHYGXMZI[LMPI
construction has not only flatlined but declined.”
8VEG]=SYRK
')34PER+VMH
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 'SRWXVYGXMSR(MZI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

4)340)%6)033/-2+
%8'327869'8-32
8)',2303+=
-RXIVIWXMRXIGLRSPSK]
YWI[MXLMRXLI
GSRWXVYGXMSRMRHYWXV]LEW
FIKYRXSMRGVIEWI
WMKRMJMGERXP]
'&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW QMRIWE
QEWWMZIGSVTYWSJQIHME
EVXMGPIWXSIREFPIEHEXEHVMZIR
VIEPXMQIQIXLSHXSHMWGSZIV
TVIHMGXERHTPSXXLIEVGSJVMWMRK
I\TIGXEXMSRWERHI\GMXIQIRX
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL*YRHMRK8VIRHW
()%07(300%67%'8-:)-2:)78367
+PSFEPIUYMX]JYRHMRKWMRGI
1-00-32
EGVSWW
()%07
'327869'8-328)',
78-00703;
;LMPIERH
LEZIWIIRQSVIHIEP
EGXMZMX]XLERTVIZMSYW
]IEVWXLIEVIEEWE
whole hasn’t seen too
QYGLEGXMZMX]GSQTEVIH
XSSXLIVXIGLWIGXSVW
WE[EJYRHMRKWTMOI
XLEROWXSPEVKIVSYRHWXS
4VSGSVI4PER+VMHERH
3R7LETI
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

'327869'8-328)',834()%07
=8(EWSJ
'314%2= %139286392( 59%68)6 7)0)'8-2:)78367
%RHVIIWWIR,SVS[MX^
2I[)RXIVTVMWI
17IVMIW( 5 %WWSGMEXIW2SVXL
&VMHKI:IRXYVI
4EVXRIVW
14VMZEXI)UYMX] 5 8%%WWSGMEXIW
3'SRRSV:IRXYVIW
17IVMIW* 5 &IWWIQIV:IRXYVI
4EVXRIVW
*SYRHIVW*YRH
17IVMIW& 5 7IUYSME'ETMXEP=
'SQFMREXSV

()%07,%6)-283
'327869'8-328)',
(IEPWMRXS'SRWXVYGXMSR
8IGLMRHMGEXIE
HIZIPSTMRKWTEGI8LIVI
LEWFIIRKVS[XLMRIEVP]
WXEKIHIEPWLEVI[MXL
XLVIIUYEVXIVWSJHIEPWMR
=8(LETTIRMRKEX
XLIWIIHSV7IVMIW%
8LIVILEZIEPWSFIIR
QSVIQEXYVIGSQTERMIW
WPS[P]VEMWMRK7IVMIW'(
ERH)VIGIRXP]

'327869'8-328)',)<-87 '327869'8-328)',
=8( HASN’T SEEN MANY
)<-87
(IWTMXIXLIJEGXXLEXXLI
RYQFIVSJ'SRWXVYGXMSR
8IGLI\MXWLEWFIIR
MRGVIEWMRKSZIVEPPXLI
WTEGILEWWIIRVIPEXMZIP]

JI[PMUYMHMX]IZIRXW

1
% -43

%GUYMVIHF]6MXGLMI&VSW 8,)6),%:)&))2
:EPYEXMSR1 731)0%6+))<-87
8LIVILEZIFIIRWIZIVEP
1I\MXWMRXLI
WTEGIEPPSJ[LMGL
-43 %GUYMVIHF]3VEGPI LETTIRIHXLMW]IEV
:EPYEXMSR1 :EPYEXMSR1 8LIVIEVIEPWSTYFPMGP]
XVEHIH'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL
GSQTERMIW[MXL
QYPXMFMPPMSRHSPPEVQEVOIX
GETWPMOI8VMQFPIERH
%YXSHIWO
%GUYMVIHF]6STIV8IGLRSPSKMIW
:EPYEXMSR1

=)%60=92-59)-2:)78367-283'327869'8-328)', 291&)63*92-59)
-2:)783676-7)7%2(
*%007
;LMPIXLIRYQFIVSJ
YRMUYIMRZIWXSVW
TEVXMGMTEXMRKMR
'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGLLEW
WIIRWSQIZSPEXMPMX]
WE[ETIEOSJ
YRMUYIMRZIWXSVW

WIIQWXSFIWYWXEMRMRK
XLIWEQIPIZIPSJ
MRXIVIWX[MXLYRMUYI
MRZIWXSVWXLVSYKL

SJ9RMUYI-RZIWXSVW

1378%'8-:)
-2:)78367
*I[MRZIWXSVWLEZISV
QSVI'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL
GSQTERMIWMRXLIMV
TSVXJSPMS8LISRP]X[S
XLEXHSEVIFSXL
EGGIPIVEXSVW 7SQI
JYRHWEVIFIMRKVEMWIH
[MXLEJSGYWSRVIEP
IWXEXIGSRWXVYGXMSRERH
HIWMKRIK&VMGO

Mortar Ventures). There’s
EPWSERSXEFPIEFWIRGI
SJGSVTSVEXIWMRZIWXMRK

'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL
8,)630)3*'36436%8)7
'36436%8)4%68-'-4%8-32-2'327869'8-328)', '36436%8)77,3;
()%07 0-880)-28)6)78-2
=8(
'327869'8-328)',

'SQTEVIHXSSXLIVXIGL
MRHYWXVMIW[LMGLX]TMGEPP]
WII SVQSVI

TEVXMGMTEXMSRMRHIEPW

'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGLLEW
]IXXSFVIEO +SSKPI

:IRXYVIW[EWXLISRP]
GSVTSVEXIXSQEOI

QYPXMTPIFIXWMR
'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGLWMRGI

2S'SVTSVEXI4EVXMGMTEXMSR 'SVTSVEXI4EVXMGMTEXMSR

'3286%'8367
%'59-6)*361%6/)8
7,%6)
0EVKIGSRXVEGXSVWMRXLI
GSRWXVYGXMSRWTEGI
X]TMGEPP]EGUYMVI
GSRWYPXERGMIWERHSXLIV
IRKMRIIVMRKHIWMKR
JMVQW7IZIVEPLEZIQEHI
EGUYMWMXMSRWSV
MRZIWXQIRXWMRXLI
IRIVK]WTEGIEW[IPP
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

73*8;%6)
-2'9&1)287%6)
136)%'8-:)
-RGYQFIRXWMRXLI
WSJX[EVIGSRWXVYGXMSR
WTEGIEVIQYGLQSVI
EGXMZI[MXLQSVIXLER
XVERWEGXMSRWWMRGI
FIX[IIRJMVQW
%YXSHIWO[EWXLIQSWX
EGXMZIERHEPWSLEWMXW
S[RZIRXYVIEVQ

'327869'8-32
463(9'8'314%2-)7
%6)%0731%6/)8
7,%6)*3'97)(
'SQTERMIWJSGYWMRKSR
GSRWXVYGXMSRTVSHYGXW
EPWSXIRHXSMRZIWXSV
EGUYMVIGSQTERMIWXLEX
HMVIGXP]GSQTIXISVEVI
MRZSPZIHMR
GSQTSYRHWEHHMXMZIWXS
MQTVSZIXLIMVTVSHYGXW
,S[IZIVWIZIVEPLEZI
WIXYTEGXMZIZIRXYVI
EVQWMRGPYHMRK4SWGS
ERH'EXIVTMPPEV

'36436%8)7%073
'327869'8-32'36436%8)4%682)67,-47 4%682)6;-8,
78%68947
Corporates don’t just

MRZIWXSVEGUYMVI
GSQTERMIWFYXEPWS
TEVXRIV[MXLTVMZEXI
GSQTERMIWJSVEZEVMIX]
SJVIEWSRWJVSQ
WSYVGMRKTSXIRXMEP
EGUYMWMXMSRXEVKIXWXS
TVSZMHMRKQSVI
MQQIVWMZIXVEMRMRKERH
IHYGEXMSR

“Our FYWMRIWWVYRWSRYTXMQIJSVSYV
GYWXSQIVW-J[IHSMXEXEPS[IVGSWXXLERSYV
competitors, we win…
If we don’t do this, somebody else will. We
HIGMHIHXLEXQE]FI[IFIXXIVHMWVYTX
SYVWIPZIW—MRSYVS[R[E]— FIJSVIWSQIFSH]
HSIWER9FIVXSYW”
(SYK3FIVLIPQER
')3'EXIVTMPPEV
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7SYVGI)UYMTQIRX;SVPH [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

'%8)64-00%6-7
6%14-2+94%'8-:-8=
.ER– (IGIQFIV .ER– 3GXSFIV 'EXIVTMPPEVMWVEQTMRKYT

MXWEGXMZMX]MRTVMZEXI
QEVOIXWMRGPYHMRK
WIXXMRKYTEREGXMZI
ZIRXYVIEVQ8LI
MRZIWXQIRXWWTERE
FVSEHVERKISJWIGXSVW
JVSQEYXSRSQSYW
VSFSXWXSI\SWOIPIXSRW
XSIRIVK]HMWXVMFYXMSRERH
WXSVEKI

'%8)64-00%64%8)2873:)68-1) '%8)64-00%6,%7
=8(
-2'6)%7)(-87
4%8)28%'8-:-8=
'EXIVTMPPEVLEWRSXMGIEFP]
MRGVIEWIHMXWTEXIRX
EGXMZMX]MRJSV[EVH
8LMWWTMOIMRJMPMRKW
GSMRGMHIW[MXLMXWVEQT
YTSJEGXMZMX]MRTVMZEXI
QEVOIXWEW[IPPWIZIVEP
TEXIRXWGSMRGMHI[MXL
MRZIWXQIRXW
4EXIRXJMPMRKTVSGIWWMRZSPZIWE
WMKRMJMGERXXMQIPEKFIJSVIXLI
TYFPMWLMRKSJETTPMGEXMSRW8LMWHIPE]
GERVERKIJVSQWIZIVEPQSRXLWXS
2YQFIVSJ4EXIRXW4YFPMWLIH 2YQFIVSJ4EXIRXW+VERXIH SZIVX[S]IEVW
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

%2%0=7-73*
3:)6%008344,6%7)7&=7-+2-*-'%2')
'%8)64-00%6
4%8)287
Caterpillar’s patents have
LEQQIV XVYGO TYQT JYIP JYIP LSSH MQTPIQIRX TPEXI TVMQEVMP]FIIRJSGYWIH
I\LEYWX [LIIPPSEHIV EGXYEXSV ZEPZI HMWTPE] JMPXIV
QEGLMRI
QSHYPI
SRXLIEGXYEPTEVXWSJXLI
MQTPIQIRX
XVIEXQIRX [LIIP ZEPZI WTIIH TSWMXMSR GSQTSRIRX KVSYRH ZEPZI

QEGLMRIWXLIQWIPZIW
GEF QSXSVKVEHIV GMVGYMX XVYGO TS[IV KVSYRH XVEGO LSPI
3RIGSRWMWXIRXJSGYW
LSYWMRK KVEHIV JPYMH XVEGO G]PMRHIV MQTPIQIRX JYIP FVEGOIX
WIIQWXSFIJYIPEGVSWW
XLIFSEVH
JPYMH PSEHIV WIEP TS[IV TMWXSR TSWMXMSR LSYWMRK TVIWWYVI
WMKREP QSXSV EWTLEPX XVERWQMWWMSR STIVEXSV TVIWWYVI XMT WMHITPEXI
XVIEXQIRXHIZMGI TS[IV JYIP QSXSV XMVI TYQT ZEPZI TSWMXMSR

QEGLMRI
TMWXSR LSSH WTIIH TSWMXMSR TPEXI TPEXI JMVWXIRH
MQTPIQIRX
EVQEXYVI VIEVTSVXMSR [LIIP FVEOI KVSYRH XVEGO GSQFYWXMSR WMKREPMRHMGEXMZI
QSYRX JYIP QSXSV XERO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ JPYMH FSH] MRHMGEXMZI
WLSZIP GSQTSRIRX TVIWWYVI TVIWWYVI FSH] KVMPPI FIEVMRK JYIP
TEWWEKI XVEGO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ TPEXI ZEPZI FSH] GLEQFIV WIGSRHIRH

%2%0=7-73*
3:)6%008344,6%7)7&=7-+2-*-'%2')
'%8)64-00%6
4%8)287
Caterpillar’s patents have
LEQQIV XVYGO TYQT JYIP JYIP LSSH MQTPIQIRX TPEXI TVMQEVMP]FIIRJSGYWIH
I\LEYWX [LIIPPSEHIV EGXYEXSV ZEPZI HMWTPE] JMPXIV
QEGLMRI
QSHYPI
SRXLIEGXYEPTEVXWSJXLI
MQTPIQIRX
XVIEXQIRX [LIIP ZEPZI WTIIH TSWMXMSR GSQTSRIRX KVSYRH ZEPZI

QEGLMRIWXLIQWIPZIW
GEF QSXSVKVEHIV GMVGYMX XVYGO TS[IV KVSYRH XVEGO LSPI
3RIGSRWMWXIRXJSGYW
LSYWMRK KVEHIV JPYMH XVEGO G]PMRHIV MQTPIQIRX JYIP FVEGOIX
WIIQWXSFIJYIPEGVSWW
XLIFSEVH
JPYMH PSEHIV WIEP TS[IV TMWXSR TSWMXMSR LSYWMRK TVIWWYVI
WMKREP QSXSV EWTLEPX XVERWQMWWMSR STIVEXSV TVIWWYVI XMT WMHITPEXI
XVIEXQIRXHIZMGI TS[IV JYIP QSXSV XMVI TYQT ZEPZI TSWMXMSR

QEGLMRI
TMWXSR LSSH WTIIH TSWMXMSR TPEXI TPEXI JMVWXIRH
MQTPIQIRX
EVQEXYVI VIEVTSVXMSR [LIIP FVEOI KVSYRH XVEGO GSQFYWXMSR WMKREPMRHMGEXMZI
QSYRX JYIP QSXSV XERO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ JPYMH FSH] MRHMGEXMZI
WLSZIP GSQTSRIRX TVIWWYVI TVIWWYVI FSH] KVMPPI FIEVMRK JYIP
TEWWEKI XVEGO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ TPEXI ZEPZI FSH] GLEQFIV WIGSRHIRH

CATERPILLAR’S
-2:)781)28-2
948%/),%7
6)0):%284%8)287
'EXIVTMPPEVMWERMRZIWXSV
MRYRMGSVRWXEVXYT9TXEOI
8IGLRSPSKMIW[LMGLEPWS
LEWETEXIRXXSQSRMXSV
XLILIEPXLSJIUYMTQIRX
FEWIHSRHMJJIVIRX
MRHMGEXSVW

'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL
&97-2)7713()07%2(%4463%',)7
,%6(3673*8'3787#
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 8LI6IEP(IEP [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

40%')1)28-28,)
463.)'80-*)'='0)
9RHIVWXERHMRKXLITSMRXW
MRXLIGSRWXVYGXMSR
(IWMKR 4VSGYVIQIRX 'SRWXVYGXMSR 3TIVEXMSRW TVSGIWWGERLIPTWSVX
[LSXLIFY]IVWSJ
WSJX[EVITVSHYGXWEVI
ERHXLIWTIGMJMGTEMR
points that they’re
WSPZMRK
6)40%'))2%&0)36
'6)%8)
6)40%') (SXLIGSQTERMIW
VITPEGIETEVXSJXLI
I\MWXMRKTVSGIWWIREFPI
[SVOIVWMRHMJJIVIRXTEVXW
SJXLIGLEMRXSFIQSVI
)2%&0) IJJMGMIRXSVGVIEXI
IRXMVIP]RI[[SVOJPS[W
XLEXHMHRSXI\MWXFIJSVI#
'6)%8)
()7-+283307 ()7-+283307
(IWMKRWSJX[EVIERH
XSSPWJSGYWIHIEVPMIVMR
XLITVSNIGXPMJIG]GPI
KIRIVEPP]QEOIHIWMKRIVW
QSVIIJJMGMIRX7SQI
EPWSGVIEXIRI[
TVSGIWWIWJSVXLIQF]
TVSZMHMRKEHHMXMSREP
MRWMKLXSVHIWMKR
TSWWMFMPMXMIWXLI]QE]RSX
LEZILEHFIJSVI

463.)'81%2%+)1)2873*8;%6) 463.)'8
1%2%+)1)28
73*8;%6)
7SJX[EVIXLEXLIPTW
QSRMXSVETVSNIGXJVSQ
WXEVXXSJMRMWLEW[IPPEW
GVIEXIEGIRXVEPMÎHEVIE
SJMRJSVQEXMSRJSVEPP
WXEOILSPHIVWEGVSWWXLI
TVSGIWW

)59-41)281%6/)840%')7 )59-41)28
1%6/)840%')7
1EVOIXTPEGIWJSV
IUYMTQIRXXSLIPT[MXL
XLITVSGYVIQIRXSJ
QEGLMRIV]JSVTVSNIGXW
X]TMGEPP]WMQTPMJ]MRKXLI
TVSGIWWJSVFSXLWMHIWSJ
XLIQEVOIX

63&38-'7%2((632)7 63&38-'7%2(
(632)7
6SFSXWERHHVSRIWGER
FSXLVITPEGIGIVXEMR
TEVXWSJXLIGSRWXVYGXMSR
TVSGIWWEW[IPPEWGVIEXI
RI[TVSGIWWIWXLEX
didn’t exist before (IK
(VSRISTIVEXMRKERH
EREP]WMW

8,)(-786-&98-323*
'327869'8-32
463(9'87-7%073
',%2+-2+
'SRWXVYGXMSRTVSHYGXW
EVIEPWSJMRHMRKRI[
TSMRXWSJWEPIERH
HMWXVMFYXMSRQIXLSHWXLEX
EVIGPSWIVXSXLIIRH
GYWXSQIVWVIQSZMRK
RSHIWMRXLIWYTTP]
GLEMR
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&PSK [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

86)2(
()13'6%8->%8-32
8IGLTVSZMHIW
EHZERXEKIWXSWQEPPIV
GSRWXVYGXMSRTPE]IVWF]
PS[IVMRKGSWXWSJPEVKI
GETMXEPI\TIRWIW
GVIEXMRKTVMGMRK
XVERWTEVIRG]TVSZMHMRK
QSVIEZIRYIWXSQEVOIX
WIVZMGIWSJJIVMRK
ZIVMJMGEXMSRJSVKSSHW

WIVZMGIWERHQEOMRKXLI
GSRWXVYGXMSRFYWMRIWW
PIWWVIPMERXSR
VIPEXMSRWLMTWEPSRI
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL &VMXMWL'SPYQFME0E[-RWXMXYXI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

86)2('328
()13'6%8->%8-32
834(3;2 &3883194
(IQSGVEXMÊXMSRQIERW
JSGYWWLMJXWXSXLI
MRHMZMHYEPWWQEPPIV
TPE]IVW8SEZSMHPSRKIV
WEPIWG]GPIWSJPEVKIV
GSRWXVYGXMSRJMVQWQER]
WXEVXYTWJSGYWSRWQEPP
FYWMRIWWIWERHQSZI
JVSQXLIFSXXSQYTE
similar tactic we’ve seen
MRSXLIVXIGLZIVXMGEPW
WYGLEW7PEGO
86)2(
%++6)+%8-32
&]TVSZMHMRKYWIVJVMIRHP]
ERHWMQTPMJMIH
I\TIVMIRGIWYWIVWJPSGO
XSRI['SRWXVYGXMSR
8IGLWXEVXYTW[LMGLMR
XYVREPPS[WXLITPEXJSVQ
XSLEZIFIXXIV
RIKSXMEXMRKTS[IV[LIR
HIEPMRK[MXLXLIWYTTP]
WMHIERHGVIEXMRK
WXERHEVHMÊXMSR[LIVIMX
didn’t exist before.
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL ,SY^^ [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

86)2(
78%2(%6(->%8-32
%2(7'%0%&-0-8=
%WQSVISJXLI
GSRWXVYGXMSRTVSGIWWMW
WXERHEVHMÎHMXFIGSQIW
IEWMIVXSWGEPIYTXLI
KSSHWERHWIVZMGIWERH
WGEPIHS[RXLIGSWXW
8LMWGERFIER]XLMRK
JVSQWXERHEVHM^MRK
TVSGIWWPMOIKIXXMRK
TIVQMXW XSWXERHEVHM^MRK
TEVXWTVIJEFLSYWIW
ERHQSVI
86)2(13&-0)7))7
78632+*338-2+-2
'327869'8-32
8LIRYQFIVSJQSFMPI
YWIVWMRXLIGSRWXVYGXMSR
MRHYWXV]MWMRGVIEWMRK
IWTIGMEPP]MRJMIPHVIPEXIH
YWIGEWIW-RGVIEWMRKP]
QSVITISTPI[MXLMRXLI
MRHYWXV]WIIQSFMPIEWER
MQTSVXERXGETEFMPMX]
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL .&/RS[PIHKI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

86)2('328
13&-0)*3'97)('327869'8-328)','314%2-)7
13&-0)*-2(778632+
*338-2+-2
'327869'8-32
7MRGIQYGLSJXLIEGXYEP
GSRWXVYGXMSRTVSGIWWMW
HSRIMRXLIJMIPHQSFMPI
HIZMGIWERHXEFPIXWLEZI
TPE]IHEOI]VSPILIVI
[MXLWIZIVEPGSQTERMIW
going “QSFMPIfirst.”

'SRWXVYGXMSR8IGL
)1)6+-2+8)',2303+-)7
%9+1)28)(6)%0-8=
(%56- &6-2+7(:-79%0->%8-32838,)
'327869'8-327-8);-8,%9+1)28)(
6)%0-8=71%68,)01)8
.ER
46)*%&,397-2+7))7
6)2);)(-28)6)78
;LMPI4VIJEFLSYWMRKMW
RSXERI[GSRGITXRI[
TPE]IVWEVIWIIMRK
MRZIWXSVMRXIVIWX[MXL
WSQIJSGYWMRKSRQSVI
WTIGMJMGRMGLIWWQEVX
LSQIWYWXEMREFMPMX]IXG

46)*%&,397-2+,%7
1908-40)97)'%7)7
;360(,397-2+ 7ITEVEXIYWIGEWIWMR
232463*-8'%14%-+2 TVIJEFLSYWMRKGSYPH
&9-0(-2+46)*%&7,%'/7 ETTIEPXSHMJJIVIRX
HIQSKVETLMGW'LIETIV
FYMPHMRKGSWXWJSVQSVI
EJJSVHEFPILSYWMRKEW
well as “houseMREbox”
IEWISJWIXYTJSVLMKLIV
IRHLSQIW8LMWGSYPH
HVMZIHIQERHMREVIEW
&09,31)7
09<96=)(-8-32
XLEXPEGOEJJSVHEFPI
3**)67146)*%&,31)7 LSYWMRKEW[IPPEWMR
QSVIHIZIPSTIHEVIEW
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 2=(EMP]2I[W&PY,SQIW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

8,)6)89623*(
46-28-2+#
(TVMRXMRKMWWIIMRKE
VIWYVKIRGISJMRXIVIWX
IWTIGMEPP]MRXLI
GSRWXVYGXMSRERH
MRHYWXVMEPEVIEW
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

():)0341)287-2(
46-28)(1%8)6-%07
1YGLSJXLIMRXIVIWX
GSYPHFIEXXVMFYXIHXS
HIZIPSTQIRXWXLEXLEZI
LETTIRIHMRXLIEGXYEP
QEXIVMEPWXLIQWIPZIW
QER]SJ[LMGLGERFI
YWIHXSGVIEXILMKLP]
GYWXSQMÎHSVTVIGMWI
TEVXW
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL MQEXIVMEPMWI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

%9831%8)(
'327869'8-32
4EVXWSJXLIGSRWXVYGXMSR
TVSGIWWXLEXEVI
TVIHMGXEFPIERHVITIXMXMZI
EVIWIIMRKEYXSQEXMSR
EPSRK[MXLQEGLMRI
FEWIHEHZERXEKIWJEWXIV
TVSNIGXXMQIWLMKLIV
TVIGMWMSRIXG
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 1G/MRWI] [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

63&3897)-2
1%29*%'896-2+
+63;8,-22368,%1)6-'%2-2(9786-%063&387%0)783)2( 7')2%6-37;-00
1%6/)87 86%27*)6
5&='97831)67)+1)283:)67%1)4)6-3(32)=)%6&)*36)
1ER]SJXLIJYRGXMSRW[I
%YXSQSXMZI'SQTSRIRXW WIIVSFSXWFIMRKYWIHJSV
EVITVMQEVMP]
1EXIVMEP,ERHPMRK
QERYJEGXYVMRKYWI
7TSX;IPHMRK GEWIW(IZIPSTQIRXWMR
0MJI7GMIRGIW
QEXIVMEPLERHPMRKERH

WLETMRKGSYPHFIRIJMX
'SEXMRK
(MWTIRWMRK [SVOSRWMXIWEW[IPP
1IXEPW
%YXSQSXMZI3)1W
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7XEXMWXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

8,)7)86)2(7'390(
43-2883327-8)
8)140%8)(
'327869'8-32
;LIR[IXEOIXLIWI
XVIRHWXSKIXLIV[IGSYPH
WXEVXXSWIITVIJSVQEXXIH
LSYWIWXLEXEVIFYMPXSR
WMXIXLVSYKLE
GSQFMREXMSRSJ(
TVMRXMRKERHVSFSXMGW
QEOMRKWGEPEFPIERH
EJJSVHEFPIXIQTSVEV]
LSYWMRK
GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 68 [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ
$RMOMPPMRMX
59)78-327# ROVMWLRER$GFMRWMKLXWGSQ
;LIVIMWEPPXLMWHEXEJVSQ#
8LI'&-RWMKLXWTPEXJSVQLEWXLIHIXEMPWSREPPXLI
HIEPWMRGPYHIHMRXLMWVITSVX
'0-'/,)6)837-+294*36*6))
'&-27-+,87'31
$GFMRWMKLXW

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL
Future of Housing
WITHIN 24 HOURS
Briefing recording will be distributed
The presentation will also be sent to you.

Feel free to share with colleagues. The
resolution of some slides may be suboptimal
due to the webinar software. Those slides will
look fine in the presentation that we send you.
http://support.citrixonline.com/en_US/Webinar 2
JOIN THE CONVERSATION ON TWITTER
@cbinsights
@alexander_paci
#futurehousing
3
WHO WE ARE
The technology market

intelligence platform.
CB Insights software lets you predict, discuss,
and communicate emerging technology trends
using data in ways that are beyond human
cognition. We are a leader in the Expert Automation
& Augmentation Software (EAAS) space.
4
TRUSTED BY THE WORLD’S LEADING COMPANIES
“We use CB Insights to find emerging trends

and interesting companies that might signal a shift in
technology or require us to reallocate resources.”
Beti Cung, Corporate Strategy, Microsoft
5
CBI Councils bring together experienced executives to accelerate their success through the
sharing of experience-based insights that inform business decisions and help solve complex
strategic, organizational and growth challenges.
If you are a C-level, EVP or SVP level executive at a company doing

$1B+ revenue, request an invite by emailing councils@cbsinghts.com.
PARTICIPATING COMPANIES
LEARN MORE HERE
events.cbinsights.com/councils
councils@cbinsights.com
cbinsights.com
ABOUT THE ANALYST
Alex Paci
Intelligence Analyst
@alexander_paci | apaci@cbinsights.com
Alex Paci is an intelligence analyst at CB Insights covering startup and venture

capital trends in real estate and financial services. His research has been cited
in Wired, The New York Times, The Financial Times, and The Wall Street Journal.
7
Contents
11 16 27
Housing & construction Startups & new construction FAMGA initiatives

trends techniques
8
THE BIG IDEA
Driven by a convergence of technology development and

market need, entrepreneurs and technology companies alike
have drawn aim at the residential construction industry.
Insurgent startups are testing a variety of construction

techniques, while big technology companies are participating
through direct development projects.
9
HOUSING OF THE FUTURE FLASH BRIEFING
1 2 3
BACKGROUND & TRENDS STARTUPS FAMGA PARTICIPATION

Housing & construction trends Startups & new construction techniques Big tech’s real estate initiatives
10
1 2 3

11
What’s driving this trend? A national housing shortage
The US has a housing shortage of 7.3 million

units.
Home prices rose 6.2% in 2017, two times more than income, and three
times inflation. One in four Americans is “severely rent burdened”
(paying more than 50% of their monthly income on housing) as a
consequence.
Lack of labor, as well as limited land supply and

strict zoning regulations are inhibiting
construction of new homes.
In Seattle, for instance, single-family accounts for 49% of all
“developable land mass,” with 8% devoted to multi-family, and 8% for
commercial real estate. The majority of new housing is focused on
multi-family.
Source: WSJ, Sidewalk Labs 12

MORE HOMES NEEDED
“No matter what we do to deliver more value to

customers, the fundamental problem is that there aren’t
enough homes to buy.”
Glenn Kelman
President & CEO, Redfin
13
ONE BIG REASON FOR THE LACK OF NEW HOUSING IS THE COST OF CONSTR UCTION
The US construction industry invests 0.5% of annual

construction value in R&D. This compares to 3.7% for
automotive, and 8.8% for computing & electronics.
This makes the economics of housing innovation hard.
Source: Sidewalk Labs

14
“It’s shocking how poorly things work. There’s a lack of
quality processes throughout the system.”
Michael Marks
Chairman, Co-Founder, Katerra
15
1 2 3

16
INNOVATIONS IN CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY
Offsite: modular and prefabricated
Factory production Supply chain & BIM design Energy & Sustainability
Companies are investing in repeatable Companies that own both the design Builders are turning to carbon neutral
processes for the construction of and construction process have and sustainable materials like tall
modular units or component parts. developed standardized design to timber and mycelium.
maximize materials efficiency and
procurement.
17
STACKABLE HOME UNITS
Total Funding
$6.08M
Blokable manufactures
structured building systems
for developers to bring small
format residential, retail, and
mixed-use projects rapidly to
market.
SELECT INVESTOR(S)
Borealis Ventures, Jason Calacanis,
Kapor Capital, Urban.us, Vulcan Capital
18
OWNING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
Total Funding
$1.16B
Katerra’s integrated
technology offering connects
Building Information
Modeling (BIM) tools and
computational design directly
to an ERP global supply
chain. Materials arrive at
construction sites just-in-time
and ready to install.
SELECT INVESTOR(S)
DFJ Growth Fund, SoftBank Group,
Foxconn Technology Company
19
Katerra expanding via acquisitions and factories
Katerra is expanding its
capacity. Recently the company
acquired Fields Construction
Company of New Jersey. Field’s
will rebrand and adopt Katerra’s
technology practices.
The company plans to open six

manufacturing plants in 2019,
including a timber factory in
Spokane, Washington.
The plant will produce CLT, or
cross-laminated timber.
Source: Inman, Building Design + Construction 20

The potential of tall timber construction
The T3 building, pictured below, is one of the largest timber buildings in North America at seven stories and
220,000 sq/ft. Tenants include Amazon.
21
Canada pushing timber forward in construction
Given the abundance of lumber in Canada,
much of the development of timber
construction is occurring there.
In October of 2017, Canada’s Minister of

Natural Resources, Jim Carr, announced a
mass timber program called Green
Construction Through Wood which
encouraged timber construction in tall
buildings.
This is the second such timber program, the

first being the Tall Wood Building
Demonstration Initiative, a program which
resulted in the 18 story Brock Commons
Tallwood House at the University of British
Columbia, the tallest majority wood structure
in the world (right).
Source: Canada.ca, NRCN.gc.ca 22

pushes co
co-living as a way to repurpose space
Starcity is an example of a company in the growing coliving space. The San Francisco-based startup is a graduate of Y Combinator and has raised
$18.6M to date, most recently via a $16.4M Series A from Alrai Capital, Bullpen Capital, Invest AG, and Y Combinator.
23
ADULT DORMS
Total Funding
$65M
Common offers flexible
shared housing connecting
vetted members to private
rooms in furnished
properties.
SELECT INVESTOR(S)
Maveron, Norwest Venture Partners,
8VC
24
SOLVING FOR A MARKET NEED
"I'm not looking to change the way people live. I'm looking
to solve a housing need."
Brad Hargreaves
CEO, Common
25
DIGGING DEEPER
Construction tech
The following links will enable you to directly access some of the platform
capabilities highlighted during this briefing.
Collections Trends
Construction tech collection Prefab trends search
Reports & Research Profiles

Construction tech market map Blokable Starcity
Offsite Construction Companies Katerra Common
WeWork report
Not a customer? Get access today.

1 2 3

27
In addition to insurgent startups, some of the largest technology
companies are driving innovation via partnerships, paid projects,
and developments.
28
+
While not the most significant foray into

construction, Amazon has recently formed a
partnership with Lennar, Shea, and Brookfield
Homes, some of America’s largest residential
home builders and developers.
The terms of the Lennar partnership call for

Amazon experiences centers in California,
Florida, Georgia, Texas, Virginia, and
Washington where customers can tour Lennar
homes and interact with Amazon’s suite of
smart home devices.
Amazon’s smart devices will be physically

implanted into every new residence Lennar
builds.
Source: Amazon, The Information 29

developing a presence in multi-family
Separately, Amazon has crept into multi-

family real estate as well. In October 2017,
Amazon formed partnership with landlords
including AvalonBay Communities Inc., Equity
Residential, Greystar, and Bozzuto Group, to
place package delivery lockers in buildings
representing over 850,000 units in the US.
Greystar, for instance, which manages

415,000 units, will install the Amazon locker
hub system in 125 communities, and offer the
service to all of its buildings.
Source: WSJ 30
plans for Willow Campus
Facebook has plans to expand
its campus in Menlo Park and
add residential housing.
The company will construct

1,500 units housing, of which
225 will be at below-market
rates.
Additionally, the plans call for

mixed-use retail, including a
grocery store and pharmacy, in
addition to 8 acres of plazas,
parks, and biking/pedestrian
paths.
Source: Facebook 31
+ build 300 homes
Google’s largest foray into
residential construction to-date
has been its development plans
for Moffett Field in Mountain
View. The company ordered 300
modular housing units,
spending between $25-$30M on
the order. Factory OS, based in
Vallejo, California will fulfill the
order.
Factory OS claims it reduces

cost by 20% while building 40%
faster.
Source: Mercury News, Factory OS 32

In 2015, Google
restructured as
Alphabet.
Sidewalk Labs is
dedicated to urban
innovation efforts.
33
and a bold plan to rewrite the city
Sidewalk Labs lays out a vision for a highly sophisticated neighborhood in Toronto, measured by a sensor network
and served by progressive approaches to residential, retail, energy, and transport solutions.
Source: Sidewalk Labs 34

Expansive plans tied together by a digital layer
The neighborhood’s digital layer
will be achieved via a net of
sensors and cameras that will
provide an “unprecedented
degree of insight into the
physical environment.” The
digital platform will have four
main components:
• Sense
• Model
• Map
• Account

A blend of cutting edge construction methods
Modular or volumetric
construction will be
complemented by “one and two-
dimensional” components,
similar to the kind of
construction a company like
Katerra performs.

Designing the ‘Loft’ for multipurpose building usage
Sidewalk Labs is developing a building product called Loft that integrates many of the construction techniques discussed here. The product’s
thesis centers on the assumption that “ongoing and frequent interior changes” will be demanded of each building, and therefore an interior unit that
can be reconfigured within a “strong skeletal structure” is optimal; reducing the cost of future construction. This is termed ‘radical mixed use,’
where residential, retail, office, and parking might occur within the same buildings.

LOOKING AHEAD…
Will large technology companies and startups collaborate further on campus housing
initiatives?
Will big technology companies seek to partner with existing construction players (e.g.
Amazon expanding its partnership with Lennar)?
Will Sidewalk Labs’ Toronto project lead to larger urban planning projects in major US
cities?
Are any startups in construction or coliving potential acquisition targets?
38
Questions?
Twitter: @alexander_paci
Email: apaci@cbinsights.com
39
WHERE IS ALL THIS DATA FROM?
The CB Insights platform has the

underlying data included in this report
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR FREE
40
cbinsights.com
@cbinsights
41
State Of Retail Tech Q1’21 Report:
Investment & Sector Trends To Watch
1
WHAT IS CB INSIGHTS?
CB Insights helps the world’s leading companies make

smarter technology decisions with data, not opinion.
Our Technology Insights Platform provides companies

with comprehensive data, expert insights and work
management tools to drive growth and improve
operations with technology.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR A FREE TRIAL
1
CB Insights shapes Nestlé's point of
view on what's happening in the market
so we can build digitally-enabled
services and business models that
drive growth and scale.
Amy Thompson
Digital Innovation Manager, Nestlé
The State of Sustainability In Consumer & Retail: Ahead In 2021
Here’s Where Amazon, Facebook, And Google Are Investing In Retail
To Cultivate Disruptor Brands, Investors Look Toward Amazon Marketplace
Our Most Popular 60+ Early-Stage Companies Reshaping Food & Beverage Delivery
Client-Exclusive
Tech Market Map Report – Cybersecurity In Retail
Market Map: 50+ Startups Transforming Last-Mile Delivery
Research SoftBank-Backed Trax Raises $640M To Enable The Store Of The Future
Disrupting The $8T Payment Card Business: The Outlook On ‘Buy Now, Pay Later’
ESP Vendor Assessment Matrix – Direct Message Marketing In Consumer & Retail
ESP Vendor Assessment Matrix – Customer Data Platforms In Consumer & Retail
ESP Vendor Assessment Matrix – Customer Feedback Management In Consumer & Retail
Tech Market Map Report – New Products & Services For Retail In Cleaning & Sanitation Tech
The Future Of The Smart Home
Food Waste Is Suddenly A Priority For Corporates
Consumers Are Ditching Plastic. To Keep Up, CPG Cos Must Look To These Sustainable
Alternatives
Top Food & Beverage Investors Set Sights On Sustainability

4
Tech Market Map Report – New Products & Services In Food And Beverage
Sign up for the Get CPG & Retail insights from our
CPG & Retail analysts sent to your inbox
Newsletter biweekly.
From omnichannel retail to food tech, the data-
driven CPG & Retail Insights newsletter
introduces you to the startups, technologies, and
business trends shaping the future of retail and
consumer packaged goods.
SIGN UP HERE
5
Contents
8 11 16 24 57
Summary Of Market Drivers Retail Tech Retail Tech Sector Appendix

Findings Investment Trends Highlights
6
WHAT THE STATE OF RETAIL TECH Q1'21 REPORT COVERS
IN-STORE RETAIL TECH E-COMMERCE LOYALTY & REWARDS CYBERSECURITY

Companies offering tech Companies that sell tangible TECH Vendors that provide
solutions that target brick- goods online, as well as Companies that allow global solutions for protecting
and-mortar retail operations. technologies that enable brands and local shops to digital assets, including
online sales. Excludes offer tech-enabled loyalty identifying vulnerabilities,
services and food & grocery. and rewards programs to thwarting attacks, and
their customers. training the workforce.
SUPPLY CHAIN & ON-DEMAND MEAL & GROCERY DELIVERY

LOGISTICS TECH Tech companies that offer Companies that are focused
Tech-enabled companies immediate delivery of goods on food delivery, including
that deliver services across and services. meal kits, meal and grocery
the supply chain, from freight delivery, and cloud kitchens.
shipping and warehousing to
inventory management and
last-mile delivery.
Clients can access the data used in this report in the Collections linked above. 7
Summary Of Findings
Overall retail tech trends
Retail tech investment is shifting toward a post- E-commerce companies continue to win the highest
pandemic world: Investment is flowing to omnichannel valuations: In Q1’21, 14 new retail tech unicorns were
priorities to enhance the store and connect inventories born, largely in the e-commerce sector. Three of the 5
across platforms. Retailers are looking to tech to digitize with the highest valuations – all above $1B – streamline
the store, create more personalized and engaging online online ordering and fulfillment via marketplace platforms
experiences, and speed up fulfillment. Sustainability is or faster delivery.
also top of mind following a year that bolstered the
Online delivery and marketplaces drove top mega-
importance of environmental resilience.
rounds and key M&A: Q1’21 had 73 mega-rounds (deals
Funding to retail tech is off to its fastest run rate in 5 worth $100M+), up from just 33 in Q4’20. Funding to
years: Overall, funding tripled in Q1’21 year-over-year online grocery platforms continued to accelerate; in
(YoY) to $28.9B. Deals were up 7% vs. the same period particular, grocery delivery in Asia garnered acquisition
last year. Funding continued its upward trend from the interest from big tech companies. Amazon third-party
second half of 2020, increasing 60% vs. Q4’20, while brand builders and headless commerce tech companies
deals declined by 2%. were also M&A targets.
(summary continued on the next page) 8

Summary Of Findings
Retail tech sector-specific trends
Cashierless checkout and workforce management More transferable rewards will help retailers and brands
solutions will be in focus: Retailers will continue to look boost loyalty: Executives’ discussion of customer loyalty
for efficiencies across store operations. In-store tech hit an all-time high in Q1’21. Fostering shopper loyalty will
funding doubled quarter-over-quarter (QoQ) in Q1’21 to remain a top priority as consumers resume some
$2.2B, and nearly quadrupled vs. the same period in “normal” spending habits. Funding to loyalty & rewards
2020. Deals increased 6% vs. last quarter. tech companies increased in Q1’21 by 7% over Q4’20,
though deals declined 33%.
Look for retailers and brands to invest in more
personalized e-commerce experiences: Funding to e- E-commerce growth is prompting more interest in
commerce tech in Q1’21 jumped by 73% from the prior cybersecurity tech: Fraud protection and consumer data
quarter to $11.7B. Deals declined slightly, by 4%. To keep privacy will be increasingly important as a significant
up with online shoppers’ expectations, investment will portion of consumer spending lives online. While funding
flow to tech companies that personalize search results, to retail-focused cybersecurity tech in Q1’21 ($1.8B) was
enable virtual try-ons, and support livestream commerce. down 14% vs. Q4’20, it was still 37% higher than the
same period a year ago. Deals were also down from
Q4’20.
(summary continued on the next page) 9

Summary Of Findings
Retail tech sector-specific trends (cont’d.)
Retailers and brands remain focused on tech that will The dark convenience store model will propel ultra-fast
strengthen and streamline their supply chains: essentials delivery: The 11 deals in Q1’21 for dark c-
Financing is flowing to supply chain visibility tools, as stores – which promise anywhere from 10- to 30-minute
well as tech to make fulfillment faster and more efficient, delivery windows – surpassed total deals to the space in
like on-demand warehousing and micro-fulfillment. all of 2020. Overall, food and beverage delivery tech
Investment in supply chain & logistics tech, which hit financing was up nearly 120% in Q1’21 over Q4’20, hitting
$8.6B in Q1’21, was about flat vs. Q4’20, but nearly $8.6B. Deals rose by 31%. Group grocery buying
doubled on a YoY basis. platforms remain hot in China, where consumers in
second-tier cities are using the models to get lower
Merchants will look for tech to enable even faster
prices on groceries and fresh produce.
delivery: On-demand delivery funding increased 50% in
Q1’21 from the previous quarter, to $6.1B. Deals were up
9%. Platforms that connect brands and retailers to local
delivery carriers will be in focus as consumers continue
to expect fast order fulfillment.
10
Q1’21
Retail Tech
Market
Drivers
11
Q1'21 RETAIL TECH MARKET DRIVERS
Omnichannel tech a high priority for execs

Expect retailers to integrate more tech to enhance the store experience and connect each point of the customer
journey across digital and in-store channels.
Earnings call mentions of “omnichannel,” Q1’16 – Q1'21

The thing that matters most
economically with digital is the growth
in guest spend in total as they
become those omnichannel guests
that have a deeper relationship with
Target overall.
Michael Fiddelke
EVP and CFO, Target

Earnings Call (3/2/2021)
Source: CB Insights 12
More investment in engagement throughout

the digital journey
With more e-commerce fundamentals in place, retailers and brands are turning their attention to tools to
manage online content and reach consumers more efficiently across digital platforms.
This year onwards, it's going to be We're going to add a lot more We are investing in content, retail
about unlocking the future of personalization and services this research, and innovation specifically
shopping for our customers, meeting year that remove friction through that for e-commerce.
them in their shopping journey in a [e-commerce] channel, making it easy
highly personalized omni-fashion. In to shop, see best sellers, more types Lawrence Kurzius
fact, we want to start serving our of payments and personalization to
customers right when they start really reach [the shopper]. CEO, McCormick & Company
consuming content. Earnings Call (3/30/2021)
Bruce Thorn
Suresh Kumar
CEO, Big Lots
EVP, Global Chief Technology Officer Earnings Call (3/11/2021)
& Chief Development Officer, Walmart
Retailers’ media networks will drive cross-

channel shopper reach In Q1’21, Macy’s added its name to the list
of retailers that have launched media and
News mentions of “retail” or “retailer” and “advertising
advertising networks to build customer
network,” “ad network,” or “media network,” 2016 – Q1’21 insights as well as revenue. This will make
tech that can track shoppers’ omnichannel
behavior even more crucial for retailers.
Sustainability is top of mind

Environmental resilience gained new importance last year. Brands and retailers continue to prioritize tech that will
help reduce emissions, optimize resources, and create transparency and traceability across their value chains.
Home Depot Opens Automated Dallas

Earnings call mentions of “sustainable” and “retail” Fulfillment Center With Hydrogen-Powered
or “brand,” Q1’08 – Q1'21 Forklifts
February 8, 2021 |
Ulta Unveils First-of-its-Kind Circular Beauty

Packaging Platform
March 9, 2021 |
Aldi Adopts New Sustainability Charter

March 10, 2021 |
Q1’21 Retail
Tech
Investment
Trends
16
RETAIL TECH INVESTMENT TRENDS
Retail tech funding tripled vs. Q1’20

Quarterly global retail tech deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21
Total Funding # Of Deals

582 568
$30,000 532
556 555
532
600
503 507 524
497 490 483 496
$20,000 400
$10,000 200
$12,543 $12,417 $12,110 $14,294 $17,149 $11,379 $11,047 $7,527 $9,317 $8,722 $12,148 $18,072 $28,861
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
Funding ($M) Deal count
Global deal shares remained steady in Q1

By continent, quarterly, Q1’18 – Q1'21
100% Australia
Africa
17% 18% 15% 16% 21% 17%
South America
18% 20% 21% 23% 20% 20%
23% Europe
75%
39% 39% 43% 40% 36% 41%

40% 41% 38% 36% 35% Asia
50% 38% 36%
25%
41% 40% 39% 40% 40% 37% 37% 37% 37% 35% 39% North America
34% 34%
0%
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
Highest-valued new unicorns are in e-commerce

Deal date // Total disclosed
Company Amount raised ($M) funding ($M) Select investors Description
3/16/2021 // $315 $411 XVC Venture Capital, DST Global Weee! is an online grocery platform specializing in Asian and
Hispanic foods. It’s available in 13 states and Washington D.C.
Valuation: $2.8B
3/26/2021 // $300 $468 Sequoia Capital, Tiger Global Getir, based in Turkey, promises 10-minute delivery for
Management convenience-store essentials. It operates a dark-store model.
Valuation: $2.6B
3/16/2021 // $200 $253 Casa Verde Capital, Gron Ventures, Dutchie is an online marketplace for local marijuana
Thrive Capital dispensaries. It is available in 24 cities in the US and Canada.
Valuation: $1.7B
3/18/2021 // $230 $406 Bessemer Venture Partners, Yotpo’s platform lets brands source and promote user reviews
Vintage Investment Partners, and content, like photos and videos. The company also offers
Hanaco Venture Capital tools to build text marketing and loyalty programs.
Valuation: $1.4B
3/30/2021 // $120 $583 Soros Fund Management, JS Tokyo-based Paidy is a buy now, pay later service for e-
Capital Management, Tybourne commerce purchases.
Capital Management
Valuation: $1.3B
Delivery tech drove top mega-rounds

Deal date // Total disclosed
Company Amount raised ($M) funding ($M) Select investors Description
2/19/2021 // $4,470 KKR, Tencent Holdings, Sequoia Xingsheng Selected, based in Hunan, China, is a group-buying
$3,000 Capital China e-commerce platform for fresh groceries.
1/26/2021// $1,500 VMS Group, IDG Capital, Yunfeng Didi Cargo is the newly launched freight division of Beijing-
$1,500 Capital based mobility tech giant Didi Chuxing. Along with delivering
cargo between cities, it is piloting home delivery of essential
items.
1/26/2021 // $2,475 Hillhouse Capital Management Hong Kong-based Lalamove is an on-demand last-mile delivery
$1,500 service that instantly matches orders with professional drivers
across Asia and in select cities in North America.
3/23/2021 // $2,397 SoftBank Group, Luxor Capital GoPuff promises delivery of 30 minutes or less on a variety of
$1,150 Group, D1 Capital Partners consumables essentials, sourced from micro-fulfillment
centers. It is in more than 500 cities in the US.
3/1/2021 // $1,000 $2,833 Undisclosed investors, Wallenstam Klarna offers point-of-sale, buy now, pay later payment
solutions for e-commerce.
Note: Mega-rounds are deals worth $100M+. “Select investors” includes participants in the specific mega-round listed. 20
Online delivery, marketplaces among

notable M&A
Uber acquired alcohol delivery India-based holding Indian conglomerate Reliance
service Drizly for $1.1B. company Tata Group bought Industries bought online grocery
a majority stake in online startup Milkbasket, which
February 2, 2021 grocery delivery company promises early morning
Big Basket for $1.3B. deliveries, for between $40-43M.
February 16, 2021 February 17, 2021
Retail tech company Warung Jungle Scout, which buys Headless commerce tech company
Pintar, which focuses on small and grows third-party Arfa acquired business
businesses in Indonesia, Amazon brands, bought intelligence platform Yaguara and
acquired online B2B Amazon advertising tech renamed the combined company
marketplace Bizzy for $45M. specialist Downstream. Chord.
February 24, 2021 March 4, 2021 March 24, 2021
Big tech in Q1: Amazon’s retail investments

ACQUISITIONS INVESTMENTS
• Selz (2/16/2021): Australia-based e-commerce platform provider • Deliveroo (1/17/2021): UK-based food delivery company.
for small businesses. The acquisition could help Amazon reach
small businesses and compete with Shopify. • Rivian (1/19/2021): Electric vehicle company making a fleet of
electric delivery vans for Amazon.
• Perpule (3/30/2021): Helps stores in India get online. The
acquisition funnels into Amazon’s broader efforts to digitize • MyGlamm (3/18/2021): On-demand beauty and spa services
retail in India. platform.
• Cameo (3/30/2021): Celebrity video platform, with investment
from Amazon’s Alexa Fund.
Big tech in Q1: Alibaba’s retail developments

INVESTMENTS BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS
• Seeshion Tech (1/25/2021): Video production for platforms like • In January, Alibaba and Unilever announced a “Waste-Free
TikTok and Taobao. World” initiative to cut plastic use and promote recycling. The
companies developed recycling machines that use AI to identify
• Zowee Soft (1/28/2021): Makes custom home improvement different types of plastic, which are then sorted and sent to
products including cabinets, windows, doors, and more. recycling centers. The machines are in 20 locations in Shanghai
• Caihuasuan (2/26/2021): Fresh food supply chain and logistics. and Huangzhou.
• Leyan Tech (3/15/2021): Application of natural language • In March, Japan-based resale marketplace Mercari announced
processing in e-commerce and other industries. that it would list its products on Alibaba’s Taobao and Xianyu
marketplaces.
• Nice Tuan (3/31/2021): Group buying online grocery platform.
Q1’21
Retail Tech
Sector
Highlights
24


last-mile delivery.
IN-STORE RETAIL TECH DEALS AND FUNDING
As shoppers return, in-store tech funding rose

Quarterly global in-store retail tech deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

69
$2,500 66 70
60 58
55 53 52
55 60
$2,000 48 51
44 50
40 41
$1,500 40
$1,000 30
20
$500
10
$363 $944 $632 $435 $611 $749 $1,527 $874 $610 $475 $1,964 $1,003 $2,201
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: WORKFORCE MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Making store communications more efficient
Latest Round: Series A (2/17/2021) Amount: $3M Latest Round: Series B (3/2/2021) Amount: $30M
About: Quebec-based Foko Retail makes a mobile About: Retail Zipline’s platform enables connection
platform for retailers to communicate with their between retailers and their stores. Retailers can
store employees and monitor operations, audit manage tasks, offer trainings, and assess
merchandising, and more at the store. Among its performance via the tools. Among its clients are LL
clients are Whole Foods Market, Nike, Five Below, Bean, Hy-Vee, and Speedway.
and Hermes.
HIGHLIGHT #2: CASHIERLESS CHECKOUT
Personalizing the checkout-free experience

KROGER + CAPER VEEVE SUPERSMART
In January 2021, Kroger announced the

pilot of its new “KroGO” smart shopping
carts, with technology by smart cart Latest Round: Debt (3/24/2021) Latest Round: Corporate Minority (2/11/2021)
maker Caper.
Shoppers can scan their loyalty cards at Amount: $1.5M Amount: $10M
the start, and screens on the carts offer
personalized recommendations and About: Veeve’s smart cart features About: Israel-based SuperSmart’s
promotions, as well as help with a touchscreen that offers scan and go app offers
navigating the store. Shoppers then pay targeted recommendations product suggestions and
for their orders on a device on the cart. and coupons. Store discounts. Users finish their
employees can also offer trips by validating their orders
remote support. at SuperSmart’s scanners.


last-mile delivery.
E-COMMERCE DEALS AND FUNDING
Investment in e-commerce continued to climb

Quarterly global e-commerce deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

$12,000 267 300
261 259 251 255
242 245
$10,000 234 232
211 208 206
202
$8,000 200
$6,000
$4,000 100
$2,000
$3,966 $5,455 $5,350 $5,778 $5,138 $4,271 $5,078 $4,249 $2,785 $3,495 $6,446 $6,738 $11,670
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: ONLINE CONTENT MANAGEMENT
Increasing needs for personalization tech

PERSONALIZED EXPERIENCE SMART BASKET BUILDING
Latest Round: Series D (1/26/2021) Amount: $150M Latest Round: Seed (2/8/2021) Amount: $1.5M
About: Bloomreach personalizes online search, About: Compat.io’s tech automates online product
merchandising, and product recommendations recommendations, bundles, and solutions for high-
across platforms using AI. consideration items like electronics and outdoor
sports equipment.
HIGHLIGHT #2: VIRTUAL TRY-ON TECH
Virtual try-on tech could boost beauty, fashion
Latest Round: Series C (1/6/2021) Latest Round: Series A (3/16/2021) In March, Snap acquired Berlin-based Fit
Analytics, which makes an online sizing tool
Amount: $50M Amount: $6.5M that uses shopper input and machine
learning to make size and product
About: Perfect Corp’s virtual try-on About: 3DLook’s mobile body recommendations. Snap plans to use the
tech powers retailers’ and scanning tech YourFit gives acquisition to help increase shopping on its
brands’ online and in-store shoppers instant size and fit platform.
tools, as well as its own recommendations matched
consumer app YouCam to brands’ products.
Makeup.
HIGHLIGHT #3: LIVESTREAM COMMERCE
Demand rises for livestream tech
Latest Round: IPO (2/5/2021) In March, Nordstrom introduced a Walmart launched its second livestream
shoppable livestream platform called shopping event on TikTok in March. This
Amount: N/A Nordstrom Live, with the aim of prompting time, the event highlighted beauty
discovery and driving personalization. products. TikTok creators shared beauty
About: Kuaishou, a popular Experts will style clothes, showcase tutorials and shoppers were able to order
livestreaming platform in beauty products, and interact with products directly from the channel.
China, recently added e- shoppers through livestreams.
commerce capabilities that
allow users to buy directly
from Kuaishou influencers.
HIGHLIGHT #4: DECENTRALIZED COMMERCE
NFTs offer new potential for digital connection

Non-fungible tokens, which represent digital assets verified through the blockchain, have caught fire among execs
across industries. Brands are already using NFTs to create unique online experiences. Merchants could use them to
reduce online transaction costs and bypass intermediaries like Amazon.
DECENTRALIZED COMMERCE
Earnings call mentions of “NFT” or “non-fungible INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANIES
token,” Q1’16 – Q1’21
Boson Protocol Splyt Core
Latest round: $6.65M Latest round: $2.75M

Unattributed - II (3/11/2021) Seed VC - II (3/26/2021)
Boson Protocol develops a Splyt Core is an open-source e-
network for exchanging digital commerce protocol built around
assets for physical items using NFTs. Its app allows existing e-
NFTs. commerce stores to integrate
NFT infrastructure.


last-mile delivery.
LOYALTY & REWARDS TECH DEALS AND FUNDING
Loyalty tech funding was up, but deals declined

Quarterly global loyalty and rewards tech deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

$500 25
21
$400 19 20
18
17
15
$300 14 15
13
12 12
11
$200 9 8 10
7
$100 5
$49 $141 $63 $290 $44 $117 $253 $107 $410 $33 $103 $243 $260
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: LOYALTY A TOP FOCUS
Execs’ discussion of loyalty hit an all-time high

Executives are feeling an escalating need to engage consumers across channels.
Earnings call mentions of “loyalty” and “shopper” or “consumer,”

Q1’08 – Q1'21
Candidly, we don't think our industry or
us have cracked the code [in rewards].
So … it opens the door to a more
comprehensive and innovative
approach to loyalty and the other
consumer offers that can be
incorporated … the focus of the new
program that we're developing in parallel
with the rebranding efforts is really
going to focus on ease, connection, and
value.
Brian Hannasch
CEO, Alimentation Couche-Tard

HIGHLIGHT #2: FUNGIBLE LOYALTY POINTS AND REWARDS
Transferable rewards connect digital, physical
Latest Round: IPO – Reverse Merger Latest Round: Seed (2/24/2021) Latest Round: Angel (3/25/2021)
(1/11/2021)
Amount: N/A Amount: $5M Amount: $480k
About: Bakkt allows consumers to About: Lolli is a bitcoin rewards About: London-based Swapi
convert participating application that lets allows users to swap
rewards programs and people earn and own their loyalty rewards,
loyalty points into cash, bitcoin when they shop cashback, and gift cards
crypto, or other types of online. between brands.
rewards and loyalty points.


last-mile delivery.
CYBERSECURITY TECH IN RETAIL DEALS AND FUNDING
E-com growth spurred more cybersecurity deals

Quarterly global retail cybersecurity deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

$2,500 40
31 30
$2,000 28 29
27 30
25
$1,500 22 21
18 18 19
20
15 14
$1,000
10
$500
$219 $1,317 $268 $512 $622 $1,604 $888 $552 $1,300 $1,323 $907 $2,079 $1,779
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: E-COMMERCE FRAUD PROTECTION
E-commerce fraud protection is maturing
Latest Round: Acquired (1/8/2021) Latest Round: Series C (2/4/2021) Latest Round: Series E - II (3/1/2021)
Amount: $640M Amount: N/A Amount: $3.4M
About: In January, credit reporting About: Arkose Labs tracks and About: Riskified uses AI to recognize
agency Equifax acquired challenges fraudulent legitimate customers in e-
Kount, which uses AI to behavior in retail, commerce to help retailers
track fraudulent payments, gaming, travel, drive conversion and sell
transactions in retail and and other businesses. internationally.
other businesses.
HIGHLIGHT #2: CONSUMER DATA PRIVACY
Focus on automating global privacy compliance
Latest Round: Series B Amount: $20M Latest Round: Series B Amount: $30M
About: Wirewheel’s data privacy management platform About: DataGrail’s privacy platform helps companies
helps retailers and brands automate compliance comply with data privacy regulations via
with global laws and meet consumer preferences automation. It promises to help businesses build
for privacy. privacy and data protection into their broader apps
and operations.


last-mile delivery.
SUPPLY CHAIN & LOGISTICS TECH DEALS AND FUNDING
Supply chain funding maintained Q4’s fast pace

Quarterly global supply chain & logistics tech deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

$12,000 181 200
174
157 161 157
$10,000 146 146 144
143 141 140 150
$8,000 120
111
$6,000 100
$4,000
50
$2,000
$6,542 $4,733 $5,406 $5,377 $10,284 $5,324 $3,631 $2,178 $4,335 $3,298 $2,376 $8,562 $8,554
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: SUPPLY CHAIN VISIBILITY
Visibility tech drives resilience & sustainability
Latest Round: Series B - IV (2/11/2021) Latest Round: Series C (1/14/2021) Latest Round: Series D (3/24/2021)
Amount: $18M Amount: $32M Amount: $100M
About: Roambee's sensor logistics About: Shippeo allows customers About: FourKites is a logistics
platform uses IoT sensors to track road and sea technology platform that
to collect data and AI to shipments via GPS as they utilizes Machine-2-
deliver insights. move across the globe. Machine (M2M)
technologies.
45
HIGHLIGHT #2: LAST-MILE EFFICIENCY
Companies streamlining fulfillment gain traction

ON-DEMAND WAREHOUSING E-COMMERCE FULFILLMENT WAREHOUSE AUTOMATION
Latest Round: Series B (3/16/2021) Latest Round: Series D (3/3/2021) Latest Round: Series E (2/17/2021)
Amount: $31M Amount: $135M Amount: $150M
About: Flowspace is a logistics About: Deliverr provides About: Locus Robotics designs
company that provides on- fulfillment centers. It and builds autonomous
demand warehousing and uses machine learning to mobile robots for use in
services to businesses of determine which of its warehouses.
all sizes. warehouses to use when
storing clients’ goods.
46
HIGHLIGHT #3: AUTOMATED FULFILLMENT
Micro-fulfillment continues to move into the

mainstream
Walmart is Expanding Its Robot- Ahold Delhaize Launching Automated
Powered Fulfillment Centers To Fulfillment Center In Philadelphia
‘Dozens Of Locations’ February 16, 2021 |
January 27, 2021 |
Albertsons Is Taking The Next Step In H Mart Plans Micro-Fulfillment Center

Testing MFC* Technology To Fuel Online Grocery
March 22, 2021 | March 30, 2021 |
*Micro-fulfillment center. 47


last-mile delivery.
ON-DEMAND DEALS AND FUNDING
On-demand deals and funding on the rise

Quarterly global on-demand deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

79 78 79 80
75 77 76
$8,000 80
61
58
$6,000 55 53 60
49
37
$4,000 40
$2,000 20
$5,297 $2,825 $5,002 $5,622 $5,057 $4,490 $2,635 $1,374 $3,404 $2,155 $1,616 $4,042 $6,054
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: SAME-DAY DELIVERY
Using tech to enable fast local delivery
Latest Round: Incubator/Accelerator Amount: N/A Latest Round: Series A (3/16/2021) Amount: N/A
(3/4/2021)
About: Ohi enables same-day delivery for direct-to- About: Amsterdam-based Bringly enables same-day
consumer brands by bringing inventory closer to delivery from stores in 40 cities in the Netherlands
customers. The company helps brands set up and Belgium. Its couriers use road bikes, cargo
micro-fulfillment centers in cities by targeting bikes, and electric vehicles to deliver orders.
empty offices or retail space, then connects with
local carriers to optimize delivery.
HIGHLIGHT #2: FAST B2B DELIVERY
Funding flowed to materials delivery services
Latest Round: Series A (1/21/2021) Amount: $6M Latest Round: Angel (2/8/2021) Amount: $1.1M
About: Curri offers an on-demand courier service between About: Australia-based Getter is a marketplace and
contractors and construction suppliers. Its express delivery service for trade materials for
vehicles, such as trucks or flatbeds, are construction sites. Its fleet delivers in metro
specialized to materials and construction Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane.
deliveries.


last-mile delivery.
MEAL AND GROCERY DELIVERY DEALS AND FUNDING
Funding continued to flow to grocery delivery

Quarterly global meal and grocery delivery deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 — Q1’21

$10,000 81 90
78
75 72
71 68 71
$8,000 67
60 62
56 55 57
60
$6,000
$4,000
30
$2,000
$4,546 $1,781 $3,760 $4,638 $3,994 $4,106 $2,348 $969 $2,797 $1,945 $3,092 $3,938 $8,601
$0 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: DARK CONVENIENCE STORES
Record-high funding & deals for dark c-stores

Quarterly dark convenience store deals and funding ($M), Q1’18 – Q1’21

$2,500 11 12
$2,000
8
$1,500
5
$1,000
3 4
2 2 2 2
$500
1 1
0
$0 0
$0
0 $0 $750 $40 0
$0 $3 $453 $2,035
$169 $167 $2.9
$0 $134 $114 0
Q1'18 Q2'18 Q3'18 Q4'18 Q1'19 Q2'19 Q3'19 Q4'19 Q1'20 Q2'20 Q3'20 Q4'20 Q1'21
HIGHLIGHT #1: DARK CONVENIENCE STORES
Funding fueled expansion of ultra-fast delivery
Weezy Cajoo
Where: London Where: Paris and Lille, France
Latest round: $20M Latest round: $7.2M
Series A (1/13/2021) Seed VC (2/4/2021)
Delivery estimate: 15 minutes Delivery estimate: 15 minutes
Latest Round: Series C (3/26/2021) Amount: $468M
About: Turkey-based Getir, which uses the dark

convenience store model to deliver groceries to Fridge No More Gorillas
customers in 10 minutes, reached unicorn status Where: Select Brooklyn, New Where: Germany, Netherlands,
with its latest round, led by Sequoia Capital. The York, neighborhoods UK, France
company is planning on using its recent funding to Latest round: $15.26M Latest round: $290M
expand throughout Europe.
Series A (3/9/2021) Series B at unicorn valuation
Delivery estimate: 15 minutes (3/25/2021)
Delivery estimate: 10 minutes
Source: CB Insights Note: Unicorns are private companies worth $1B+. 55
HIGHLIGHT #2: GROUP BUYING MODELS
Second-tier cities power group buying in China
Latest Round: Series D (2/19/2021) Amount: $3B Latest Round: Series D (3/31/2021) Amount: $750M
About: Xingsheng Selected is a group grocery and fresh About: Nice Tuan allows shoppers to band together to buy
produce buying platform. Group leaders distribute groceries and fresh produce in bulk and save on
the orders to the rest of the buyers and cut out the products and on fulfillment. The company
delivery costs. generates 15M orders per day.
JD.com and Tencent Holdings are among the Alibaba was among the investors in Nice Tuan’s
company’s investors. Series D round.
Appendix
57
Methodology
CB Insights encourages you to review the methodology and definitions employed to better understand the numbers
presented in this report. If you have any questions about the definitions or methodological principles used, we encourage
you to reach out to CB Insights directly. Additionally, if you feel your firm has been under-represented, please send an
email to info@cbinsights.com and we can work together to ensure your firm’s investment data is up to date.
What is included: What is excluded:

• Equity funding and deals to tech-enabled retail- and consumer- • Tech-enabled startups and other private companies for which
oriented startups and other private companies, as prescribed by retail and consumer businesses are not the primary focus. This
the 7 categories (Collections) highlighted in this report. ranges from marketing companies to certain forms of e-
• Along with B2C companies, the Collections include B2B retailers commerce enablement (e.g., payments).
and providers. The On-Demand Collection also includes service
providers.
• Categories are not mutually exclusive. For example, a grocery
delivery company may be included in both the On-Demand and
Food & Beverage Delivery Collections. Criteria for categories can
be found on page 6.
• Historical funding data is subject to change as our technology &
data operations explore data sets globally and refine company
classifications.
58
IN-STORE RETAIL TECH CYBERSECURITY
Get All The COLLECTION COLLECTION
Data Used In
This Report E-COMMERCE SUPPLY CHAIN & LOGISTICS
COLLECTION TECH COLLECTION
LOYALTY & REWARDS

ON-DEMAND COLLECTION
TECH COLLECTION
FOOD & BEVERAGE

DELIVERY COLLECTION
59
The rise of real
estate tech
The startups, corporations, and emerging technologies
transforming real estate
1
WITHIN 24 HOURS
Briefing recording will be distributed
The presentation will also be sent to you.

Feel free to share with colleagues. The
resolution of some slides may be suboptimal
due to the webinar software. Those slides will
http://support.citrixonline.com/en_US/Webinar 2
JOIN THE CONVERSATION ON TWITTER
@cbinsights
@mlcwong
#REtech
3
WHO WE ARE
The technology market

intelligence platform.
CB Insights software lets you predict, discuss,
and communicate emerging technology trends
using data in ways that are beyond human
cognition. We are a leader in the Expert Automation
& Augmentation Software (EAAS) space.
4
TRUSTED BY THE WORLD’S LEADING COMPANIES
“We use CB Insights to find emerging trends

and interesting companies that might signal a shift in
technology or require us to reallocate resources.”
Beti Cung, Corporate Strategy, Microsoft
5
TRANSFORM draws on the experience
of successful executives from today's
JOIN US ON DEC.
top companies and the latest research 4 & 5 IN NYC
on technology, growth and innovation
to cut through the fog about the coming RSVP TODAY
digital revolution.
6
ABOUT THE ANALYST
Matthew Wong
Managing Analyst, Financial Services, CB Insights
@mlcwong | mwong@cbinsights.com
Matthew Wong is managing analyst at CB Insights, where he leads a team of

research analysts covering startup, venture capital, and corporate strategy
activity and trends in financial services.
He currently manages CB Insights InsurTech Insights newsletter, which
reaches 34K+ insurance executives, investors, and professionals.
Matthew's published industry research and analysis have been featured
in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, CNBC
and The Financial Times and he has appeared on Bloomberg TV and
Business News Network.
Matthew is a magna cum laude graduate of Northwestern University.
7
Contents
9 Real estate tech investment landscape
21 Where are real estate tech startups cropping up?
33 The rise of the iBuyer
8
What is real estate tech?
“Generally, proptech (also referred to as property

technology or real estate technology) is a set of
cross-industry technologies changing the way
we research, rent, buy, and manage property.”
Source: “WTF is proptech?”, Tearsheet, February 02, 2017 9

“I think it is important on an ongoing basis to ask
‘how important is software to this business’ and
‘why now?’ Is software truly transformative/the
basis for competition for the startup?”
Elad Gil
“End of Cycle?” July 6, 2016
10
MACRO OBSERVATIONS
Real estate tech

investment landscape
11
INVESTMENT LANDSCAPE
VCs weren’t always interested in real estate…

Real estate tech funding trend (in $ million), 2008-2012
$90
$80
$70
$60
$50
$40
$30
$20
$10
$-
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
12
Investment into real estate tech is growing

Real estate tech financing trend, 2013 – 2018 YTD (10/18/2018)
$4,500 374 400
$4,000 326 335 350
$3,500 283 300
$3,000
250
$2,500
211
200
$2,000 $3,945
128 $3,419 150
$1,500
$2,893
$1,000 $2,117 100
$500 $1,225 50
$519
$- 0
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD

Dollars ($M) Deals
*Excludes WeWork and international affiliates ($5.9B+ in funding) 13

Early-stage activity ramping up

Seed/Series A real estate tech financing trend, 2013 – 2018 YTD (10/18/2018)
$1,400 300
$1,200 240 250

224
$1,000 203 199
200
$800 154
150
$600 $1,257
96
100
$400
$652 $707
$525 50
$200
$319
$197
$- 0
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD

Dollars ($M) Deals
14
Funding perspective: Real estate tech vs. fintech

Real estate tech funding vs. VC-backed fintech funding (in $ billion), 2013 - 2017
Fintech funding
$18.7
$16.7
$15.3
Real estate
$7.9 tech funding $3.4
$2.9
$2.1
$3.8 $1.2
$0.5
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Source: CB Insights Deal Search (“Real Estate Tech”), CB Insights Global Fintech Report Q2’18 15
The SoftBank effect: Real estate tech unicorns

crop up
Latest round valuations in $ billion
$20B $4.4B $2B+
Source: CB Insights Global Unicorn Club 16

WeWork makes case for $35B valuation
$20B 4.4B $2B+
Further reading: WeWork Strategy Teardown, https://www.cbinsights.com/research/report/wework-strategy-teardown/ 17

Compass is using M&A to build out national

presence and agent count
$20B 4.4B $2B+
18
Real estate incumbents make inroads in

venture capital community
$4.4B
Source: Investor websites, press mentions 19

Real estate incumbents launching CVC funds
20
SURVEY LANDSCAPE
Where startups are

cropping up
21
“(No startup) so far I know is vying to
build another online portal. No company
in a decade has tried to do that.”
Glenn Kelman
Redfin CEO
22
The real estate
tech landscape
is changing fast
Since this map was made
in March 2018, there have
already been significant
updates and startup
formation in the real
estate tech space.
23
REAL ESTATE MEETS FINTECH
Home equity startups crop up as home values

rise
24
Startups look to bring the all-cash advantage to

home buyers
FLYHOMES RIBBON
Backers: Andreessen Horowitz, Shasta Ventures, Pritzker Group VC Backers: Bain Capital Ventures, Greylock Partners, NFX, Nyca
Partners
25
Rent-to-buy: Startups look to enable gradual

home equity ownership
DIVVY VERBHOUSE
Backers: Andreessen Horowitz, DFJ, SciFi VC, Caffeinated Capital Backers: N/A
26
Home insurance startups blending into and

integrating with the home buying process
Lenders using Blend Labs represent more than 25% of the total US mortgage market with $60B in mortgage applications flowing
through its software in 2017. Blend recently launched a home insurance agency in August 2018.
Source: Andreessen Horowitz, “Making Sense of Mortgages,” Blend Labs, CB Insights analysis 27
Startups look to $15B title insurance market
In August 2018, States Title was New York-based startup Spruce is a Qualia provides cloud workflow
approved in the State of California as a digital title insurance and escrow technology to the title, escrow, and
licensed title insurer. States Title hopes agency. Spruce has worked with lenders closing process. Clients include Stewart,
to use data and technology to predict and real estate companies in 36 states First American, and Fidelity National. As
and risk and severity of a title defect on and plans to be in 48 states by the end of March 2018, 5% of the national real
particular properties. of 2018. estate market was transacted through
Qualia.
28
NEW LEASING MODELS
Startups look to help landlords find tenants

BUNGALOW REZI
Bungalow leases assets from homeowners, repurposes and Rezi plans to spend $10M over the next year buying out leases on
redecorates them, and then vets and matches renters together to vacant apartments and then renting units out itself. Rezi hopes to
serve as housemates in the fully rented-out house. Bungalow renters automate most of the approval process, including background
stay for an average of 12 months. checks.
29
TECH-ENABLED PROPERTY MANAGERS
Startups look to use tech to enable full-service

property management
GREAT JONES MYND
Great Jones is a full-service residential property management Mynd provides full-service property management of small multifamily
company that works with local property management teams in Florida buildings and single-family homes. Mynd provides an online portal
and provides its own tech platform for owners and residents. Great and app for residents to make service request, submit payments, and
Jones operates in Tampa, Orlanda, and SW Florida allow portfolio management for owners
30
REAL ESTATE DATA PLATFORMS
CRE data providers are leveraging APIs and

striking partnerships
COMPSTAK REONOMY
CompStak crowdsources information on CRE leases and sales. The Reonomy aggregates and analyzes public databases to provide
company collects by exchanging access for details on property deals intelligence on zoning information, sales, data, debt history, and
from brokers and real estate firms. Investors include Moody’s contact information. Backers include Sapphire Ventures and Bain
Corporation and Canaan Partners. Capital Ventures.
31
AI FOR REAL ESTATE INVESTING
Skyline AI is applying machine learning to CRE

investing
Skyline AI builds AI algorithms on top of data it draws from 100+ sources across crime, education, demographics, property, transactions, and
more. In June, Skyline completed a $26M transaction for two multifamily properties in Philadelphia solely using insights derived from its
platform, with plans to do more investments. In July 2018, Skyline partnered with Greystone to gain access to its data. Skyline is backed by $21M
from investors including Sequoia Capital Israel and Arbor Ventures.
32
The rise of the iBuyer
33
Online real estate transactions lag behind
34
What is an iBuyer?
An iBuyer is a real estate investor that

uses an automated valuation model
(known as an AVM) and other technology
to make cash offers on homes quickly.
Source: Zillow 35
How iBuying works in practice…
1. Seller fills out online questionnaire about their home
2. iBuyer uses algorithms and technology to determine offer price
3. iBuyer presents seller with a nonbinding offer (typically within 2
days)
4. iBuyer sends inspectors to verify value and assess any needed
repairs
5. Transaction closes and iBuyer takes ownership and charges fee
(6-8%)
6. iBuyer renovates for resale
7. iBuyer lists home
8. Offer is received, enters into closing process
Source: Zillow 36
iBuyers are targeting the largest segment of
home transactions
37
Founded in 2013, OpenDoor is the pioneer in
iBuying
Source: Macquarie Capital, September 2018

38
Market today has expanded to include Zillow,
Redfin and new startups
Source: Macquarie Capital, September 2018

39
Data and scale advantages vs. business model
transition
40
End impact on residential real estate?
Downturn?
41
Questions?
Email me: mwong@cbinsights.com
Twitter: @mlcwong
42
WHERE IS ALL THIS DATA FROM?
The CB Insights platform has the

underlying data included in this report
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR FREE
43
cbinsights.com
@cbinsights
44
What Are
Smart Cities? 2020
WHAT IS CB INSIGHTS?
CB Insights helps the world’s leading companies make

smarter technology decisions with data, not opinion.
Our Technology Insights Platform provides companies

with comprehensive data, expert insights and work
management tools to drive growth and improve
operations with technology.
SIGN UP FOR A FREE TRIAL

Table of Contents
What is a smart city? 6
Smart city breakdown 9

• Public health
• Transportation
• Sustainability
• Public services
Who’s investing in the future of smart cities? 26
Challenges and criticisms 34
Conclusion 36
What Are Smart Cities? 3

Technology is powering the rise of smart
cities, transforming everything from
traffic management to waste collection.
We dig into the digital revolution giving
rise to cities that are more connected,
sustainable, and efficient — and what the
future of urbanization might look like.
Cities are evolving at a rapid pace.
Over half the world’s population currently lives in urban areas.

By 2050, that number is expected to jump to 68%, per the UN.
Along with a growing population, new challenges are emerging

as cities look to improve everything from infrastructure to
connectivity. Many see this as a viable business opportunity,
developing technology to help cities efficiently provide proper
foundation, energy, transportation, resources, jobs, and services
to their residents.
As a result, cities are undergoing a digital transformation — turning

into “smart” cities.
The global smart cities market size is projected to be worth $1.3T,

according to CB Insights’ Industry Analyst Consensus.
Several players, from tech giants to telecom companies to

governments, are working on initiatives to make cities smarter and
more efficient.

Additionally, in the wake of Covid-19, a number of regions have
leveraged smart city tech to contract-trace and control outbreaks.
In Singapore, for instance, citizens can download an app that relies
on Bluetooth signals for contract tracing, while Taiwan set up a
digital fence system that tracks cellular signals in order to enforce
home quarantine.
In this analysis, we look at what smart cities are, the various

components of the city that are becoming increasingly connected,
players across the ecosystem, emerging challenges, and what the
future holds.

What is a smart city?
A city is considered to be “smart” when it can collect and analyze

mass quantities of data from a wide variety of industries, from
urban planning to garbage collection. In a smart city, a complex
network of interconnected sensors, devices, and software must be
built and maintained.
This should allow the city to become a more sustainable and

efficient environment for its residents.
Smart cities are supported by several types of technologies, including:
• Information and communications technology (ICT)
• Connected physical devices using the Internet of Things

(IoT) network
• Geographical information systems (GIS)

Each works together to collect and contextualize massive amounts
of data that can be used to improve the components and systems
running within a city.
The ICT framework, for example, is made up of various machines

and sensors that are all connected to the IoT network, and can
instantly transmit data using wireless technology and the cloud.
Traffic in a given area, for instance, can be monitored using sensors.
Cloud-based IoT applications can then receive, analyze, and

manage that traffic data in real time. This data can also be used
to better understand and respond to a city’s constantly changing
needs over time, and can even be used to better optimize for safety.
Smart cities can also leverage GIS for planning and mapping
purposes, as well as for improved development of cities. As a
result, urban areas are able to better manage issues from water
management to excessive energy consumption to insufficient
waste management.
Using GIS for smart water management. Source: Ceinsys Tech

Smart cities may also utilize artificial intelligence (AI) and
blockchain technology for certain systems. Some companies, for
example, are working to make parking easier and more efficient
using AI-directed facilities. Other companies allow city dwellers to
buy and sell energy to their neighbors via blockchain technology.
These are just a handful of technologies working to support the

emergence of smart cities. And over time, a successful smart city
should in theory be able to respond to incoming data much like a
single intelligent organism, seamlessly and efficiently providing
itself with exactly what the city and its citizens need, without
wasting any resources and without any human error.

Smart city breakdown
Several areas across the city are becoming “smarter,” from traffic
control to water management, with various companies working
across the different components.
PUBLIC HEALTH
The Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the potential of smart
cities in bolstering pandemic preparedness. Integrating smart
city tech like thermal cameras and IoT sensors with AI can help
prevent the spread of infectious diseases.
For example, the UAE provided its police with smart helmets
equipped with thermal cameras, face recognition sensors, and
license plate readers to track and monitor citizens.
Improving data governance and government services has also

been crucial in combating Covid-19.
Korea and Singapore both assembled public maps of confirmed

Covid-19 cases, allowing citizens to see patients’ location
histories and allowing them to stay clear of outbreak zones.
Taiwan integrated its national healthcare system with its

immigration database, allowing medical officials to send real-
time alerts to doctors about which patients were at higher risk
for contracting Covid-19 based on their travel history. Local
developers have also set up public dashboards that visualize the
real-time supply of masks and other supplies at local pharmacies.
Smartphones, as an essential component of smart cities, also

play a critical role in handling outbreaks. Their increasingly
advanced biosensors, elevated processing power, and high-speed
connectivity make them ideal candidates for boosting pathogen
detection, for one.

Several countries have also leveraged a smartphone-based
tracking system to enforce home quarantines.
Early on in the pandemic, Taiwan leveraged mobile phone tracking

by employing a digital fence system that uses location data from
cellular signals already collected by telecommunications networks.
Korea has used data from GPS phone tracking as well as credit
card records and surveillance video to trace the movements of
its citizens and inform the public if they’ve been in contact with
anyone who was infected.
Singapore has implemented contact tracing via 2 systems: the

SafeEntry program consists of QR codes that citizens scan to enter
public arenas like malls or offices, which alerts them if an active
carrier is in the same location; while the TraceTogether program
uses Bluetooth-enabled smartphones or tokens to track close
encounters with infected people.

The implementation of these protocols has raised concerns
regarding privacy and surveillance, but many officials have
emphasized the emergency nature of the situation. Other regions
have opted for voluntary, rather than mandatory, contact tracing.
The pandemic has undoubtedly accelerated the use of smart city

tech in many places around the world. It is likely we will continue
to see the proliferation of these tools as cities strive to become
more efficient and connected amid public health crises.
TRANSPORTATION
Traffic management
Smart technology can be used to connect vehicles, infrastructure,

public transit, and people to improve mobility and safety.
Streets can be outfitted with sensors that track data both on the
roads and through citizens’ cars and smartphones in order to gain
insights on traffic flow patterns, road blockages, roadwork, road
conditions, and more.
Amsterdam, for instance,

already uses a smart traffic
management system, where
traffic is monitored in real time.
This allows the city to broadcast
information about current
travel times on roads, helping
motorists decide on the best
Amsterdam City project City Alerts enables
route to take at a given time. city-wide messaging.
Innovation platform Amsterdam Smart City was created to develop

solutions for a wide range of metropolitan issues. Projects include
everything from building a smart playground to enhancing smart
grids to creating a city-wide messaging system.

Barcelona has also integrated components of smart transportation
technology into its city. The data gathered from traffic patterns has
allowed the city to design a new, more efficient bus network.
The city utilizes intelligent vehicle technology to help manage

traffic at its El Prat airport. Smart vehicle company Sensefields
has helped El Prat implement traffic control in short-stay “parking
express” areas located in departure terminals, as well as in taxi
pick-up areas. “Control stations” have been introduced to collect
data on the number of vehicles present at a location across
different times.
Parking
Aimlessly driving to find a parking spot wastes energy and

increases traffic congestion. With the use of smart technology,
however, this may become a problem of the past.
Sensors embedded in the ground can be used to identify which

parking spaces are available or occupied. These IoT sensors can
then transmit this data to a cloud-based smart parking platform,
which is aggregated into a real-time parking map of the city.
Drivers can pull up this map through an app on their phone, which
showcases the nearest parking spots available to them, thus
saving time and money.
Additionally, this technology can be used to easily alert parking

enforcement officers when a car has parked illegally.
Tracking and managing parking spots might even allow lot owners
to implement dynamic pricing. For example, Sidewalk Labs’
portfolio company Coord (which grew out of its transportation
coordination platform Flow) looks to improve mobility and
efficiencies across cities by opening up its Tolls API to third-
party developers.

The company is working on products that can aggregate pricing
and toll data to give consumers transparency on how much an
entire trip might cost. In the future, it might be able to use this
information to help lot owners price their spaces in real time.
Source: Mozio
Planning for a future with fewer cars
Another aspect of smart cities is shared ride technology.
With companies like Uber and Lyft entering cities across the world,
there might not be as much of a need for parking as there is today.
In Sidewalk Labs‘ initial vision for the now-shuttered Quayside, the
Eastern waterfront it planned to develop in Toronto, the company
outlined a stacked parking lot that might transition into other
things once autonomous or shared vehicles reduce the need for
parking garages. This included green spaces and shopping centers.

Quayside parking lots could transition over time.
Micromobility
As congestion in cities rises, existing transportation — from cars

to buses to trains — can no longer keep up with the growing
population. Americans have lost an average of 99 hours a year due
to traffic congestion, according to the 2019 INRIX National Traffic
Scorecard, and in 2019, traffic cost Americans roughly $88B, or an
average of almost $1,400 per driver.
Startups are developing sharing platforms for electric bikes and

scooters, which relieve congestion by serving as an alternative to
cars for shorter trips and by helping connect people to public transit
hubs for longer trips.

Companies such as Bird Rides and Lime offer on-demand scooter
rides, while companies like France-based Ecovelo and India-based
Yulu Bikes offer rides on electric bikes.
With cities pressed to solve the transportation crisis amid rising

concerns around gas-powered emissions, micromobility solutions
are emerging as a powerful alternative to the current public transit
mix, especially as Covid-19 impacts the sector.
There remains potential for micromobility startups to gain traction

as people look for single-rider, open-air transit alternatives. Bikes
and scooters could offer safer methods of transportation — allowing
for outdoor transit, control over social distancing, and fewer points
of shared contact — compared to public transportation.
For a deeper dive into the future of micromobility, take a look at

our report here.

Fleet management
Transportation companies and other fleet operators leverage fleet

management and telematics tech to monitor their vehicles in real
time, which can help optimize routes, reduce fuel costs, and lower
emissions.
Data collected from fleet management companies could be

leveraged to better plan and predict traffic, including leading to the
development of truck-only lanes.
San Jose is one example of how a smart city could leverage fleet
management software. Boasting 2,750 public vehicles that cover
250 city facilities, the city leverages fleet management software
to help the city improve response times to resident calls and
consistently track vehicle maintenance needs.
Per fleet manager Dan Sunseri, “We have that additional data
that we can bring into our datasets already, take that information,
report on it, and get useful information to make key decisions
about vehicle purchases, driver behavior, […] idle reduction, and
fuel use, so the information is invaluable.”
Another company working on such software is Israel-based

Fleetonomy, which was acquired by Via in September 2020.
Fleetonomy’s AI-based mobility platforms help fleet operators
predict demand, increase fleet utilization, and create new r
evenue streams.

Source: Fleetonomy
Vehicle-to-everything tech
Vehicle-to-everything tech refers to hardware (e.g. sensors, radar)

that lets vehicles communicate wirelessly with other vehicles
(V2V), pedestrian devices (V2P), or infrastructure (V2I). This
tech’s success largely depends on network effects. For example,
once enough vehicles are connected on the road and across
infrastructure, it becomes easier to navigate dangerous weather,
accidents, and congestion.
California-based Savari is developing sensors and accompanying

software to help vehicles communicate with other vehicles and
points of infrastructure. The company has received investments
from China-based automaker SAIC as well as Infiniti’s accelerator.
SUSTAINABILITY
A wide range of IoT solutions can be implemented in cities to
improve energy efficiency.

Smart street lighting can reduce energy consumption by staying
dim when no cars or people are around, then lighting up as sensors
detect someone is coming. Chicago has created a program that will
replace 270,000 lights with LED lighting equipped with intelligent
controls by 2021, saving the city an estimated $10M a year in
energy costs. Worldwide, an expected 73M connected street lights
are to be deployed by 2026, according to Navigant Research.
Chicago’s city-wide lighting initiative.
Other ways to promote energy efficiency include tapping into forms

of energy (e.g. heat, waste) that might otherwise be neglected.
In Seoul, for example, local resource recovery facilities transform
urban waste into steam to use as an alternate source of energy.
Smart cities can also promote renewable energy by allowing

rooftop solar owners to sell to each other or by operating
microgrids that can produce energy on site.

Environment monitoring
Through the use of wireless sensor networks, a smart city can

gather and analyze data related to environmental factors such
as temperature, humidity, and air quality, all throughout specific
areas of a city. This is especially critical for reducing levels of air
pollution within densely populated areas.
The World Health Organization has reported that an estimated 92%

of the global population lives with pollution above recommended
limits. About 3M deaths each year are linked to outdoor air pollution.
Varying particle pollution (PM) levels. Source: WHO
To combat this, smart cities are implementing technologies, such

as the Bosch Climo climate monitoring system, to collect highly
localized air quality information.
Each device throughout a city collects air quality measurements

that are then sent to a cloud-based application, where it is broken
down into analytics for the government and the public to see.
This helps policymakers identify which areas need the most
environmental improvements, and helps the public avoid areas
that may be especially harmful on a certain day.

Some companies are aiming to reduce the environmental impact of
cities by monitoring pollution and modeling severe weather patterns.
France-based eLichens, for one, develops sensors to measure air
pollution, while Jupiter Intelligence collects and analyzes satellite
data to predict severe weather and climate change.
Energy management
Normally, the various systems within a building — such as lighting,

video surveillance, climate control, ventilation, and fire protection
— do their jobs separately. Smart buildings, however, have all
these systems connected through an IoT network, allowing them
to communicate with each other and work together to make the
building as efficient as possible through continuous adjustments.
Sensors can detect when a particular room or office is vacant

and dedicate less lighting and fewer temperature resources to
that space. This cuts down the total energy consumption of the
building as a whole.
For example, Comfy — which was acquired by Siemens in June

2018 — has created limited, occupant-facing controls that can
be used with existing HVAC systems. The company installs
sensors and IoT devices in buildings so that occupants can adjust
temperature and lighting.

Companies are also attempting to optimize the electrical grid and
improve energy efficiency in commercial and residential buildings.
For example, ENGIE-backed Energyworx is developing an energy data
management platform that ingests and analyzes smart meter and
IoT data to generate insights around consumption patterns, which
allows utility companies to optimize bidding and pricing decisions.
These initiatives are essential to reducing the carbon footprint

of a city, since buildings account for up to 70% of total energy
consumption within a city and 30% of greenhouse gas
emissions globally.
Waste management
Smart waste management solutions can be implemented to

improve waste removal services, reduce operational costs, and
improve sustainability.
This can be accomplished through smart waste receptacles that

have sensors attached to them that measure fill level. When a
bin is full, it can instantly send this information to a cloud-based
application that can then optimize the route of waste collection
trucks, which can then prioritize pickups at locations with full bins
and skip over areas with empty ones.
This is just what the city of Santander, Spain has done. Santander
partnered with Japan-based firm NEC to deploy ~6,000 IoT-
connected devices around the city to learn the locations and fill
levels of garbage bins and containers. The municipality then uses
GPS tracking to optimize its waste collection route.

Example of a smart bin.
Smart bins can also help encourage and monitor rates of recycling.
Times Square in New York City has set up nearly 200 smart waste
and recycling stations with built-in compaction, fullness sensors,
and collection notifications. This has resulted in a 40% proper
recycling rate and a 50% reduction in collections per week.
Startups are also looking to drive efficiencies and minimize costs in

the collection, transport, and treatment of urban waste. For example,
AMP Robotics, backed by Sequoia Capital, is developing computer
vision and machine learning for recycling centers. Its technology
can identify and sort materials faster than humans would.
Water management
Smart water technologies can help improve the sourcing,

treatment, and delivery of this essential resource. Through tracking
consumption patterns for both utilities and end users, cities can
optimize and reduce water waste as well as delivery costs.

Sensors could automatically alert a city to water leaks so it could
fix them as quickly as possible. Smart water systems can also
measure rainfall and provide real-time flood analysis for flood
control.
The city of Castellon, Spain, for instance, has piloted a smart water
platform to reduce utility costs and optimize resources via smart
water meters equipped with long-range sensors.
A number of companies are improving the way cities clean,

distribute, and recycle water. Solutions include cloud-enabled
management platforms (e.g. APANA) and data-driven water quality
monitoring (e.g. Aquagenuity).
PUBLIC SERVICES
Governmental services provided to the public tend to be slow
and inefficient in many cities. However, with the use of digital
technology, public services can be streamlined in a number of
innovative ways.
Buenos Aires used to rely on an inefficient telephone hotline

system where citizens had to log a complaint or request for public
services. It took an average of 600 days — almost 2 years — to
resolve issues.
The city has since switched to a mobile app where citizens can
snap a photo of the issue, from a large pothole in the road that
needs filling to vandalized public property that needs repairing.
The app, using an integrated geographic information system (GIS),
instantly sends the location and information of the complaint to
the ministry, and work is assigned to the closest vendor that can
resolve the problem.

Once the issue has been solved, a city street inspector validates
the completed work and uploads a picture of the resolved issue
to the mobile app, so citizens can see the problem has been fixed.
Citizens can even give the public services a rating based on how
satisfied they are with the quality of work, so the government can
see where it can improve. The average time required to solve a
complaint in Buenos Aires has since fallen by 93% with no increase
in budget.
Singapore’s Municipal Services Office has also developed a

centralized mobile app called OneService, where the public can
access services across 11 government agencies and 16 town
councils, all from the comfort of their phones.
In 2007, Seoul launched the 120 Dasan Call Center. Instead of

calling different numbers to reach various district or governmental
offices, citizens could just dial 120 to speak with an operator,
whether they needed information about tourist sites, public
transportation, interpretation, hospitality reservations, or more.
The central database also holds 13,000 civil cases, allowing
operators to search for answers to inquiries rapidly.

This centralized system helps manage citizen complaints and
handles not just calls, but also texts, messaging, and social media
inquiries. On top of handling local inquiries, it’s also helped expand
the accessibility of government services for foreign tourists or the
hearing-impaired.
As of June 2016, the center had processed more than 83M

consultations, averaging 22,000 cases a day, with a satisfaction
rate of more than 91%.

Who’s investing in the future of smart cities?
As illustrated in the examples above, cities around the globe

are already implementing smart technologies to improve many
aspects of urban living. Yet, these technologies are still new to the
world and widespread adoption will take time.
Plenty of the world’s leading corporates and governments have

invested in smart city technology to help further realize this
goal. It’s clear that the smart city revolution is in full swing as
governments, cities, and companies around the globe continue
to make investments into developing and implementing smart
technology that will transform life in urban areas as we know it.
CORPORATES
According to a 2017 report by Navigant Research, the top smart
city suppliers include:
1. Cisco
2. Siemens
3. Microsoft
4. IBM
5. Hitachi
6. Huawei
7. SAP
8. Panasonic
9. Ericsson
10. GE

In 2017, Cisco dedicated $1B to building smart cities around
the globe through the use of its Kinetic IoT platform, which
has applications across smart city lighting, parking, safety,
transportation, urban mobility, and more.
Further, its City Infrastructure Financing Acceleration Program

has the goal of making it easier and more affordable for existing
cities to become smart cities, by helping them deploy their
technology with minimal initial investment. This assistance is
crucial for cities that may struggle to find the funding to implement
new smart technology.
In January 2020, Cisco launched a Cyber Vision product that

focuses on security for industrial IoT systems.
Microsoft has also announced that it is investing $5B in IoT

technology from 2018 to 2022, with the goal of improving the
technologies required for smart cities to function. The company
had already spent $1.5B on IoT initiatives prior to 2018.

Companies including Walmart, Kohler, Chevron, and Johnson
Controls all use Microsoft’s cloud platform, Azure, for a wide
range of technologies. For example, Johnson Controls has
created a smart thermostat for homes and buildings that optimize
temperatures automatically. Walmart is leveraging IoT sensors on
HVAC sensors and refrigeration systems to save energy.
In 2017, Bill Gates’ investment firm Cascade Investment bought

a stake in 24,800 acres outside of Phoenix, Arizona, which will
become a new smart city. The firm invested $80M into designing
and creating features such as high-speed digital networks, data
centers, infrastructure for autonomous vehicles, automated
logistics hubs, and more. The firm has since invested in another
patch of land in the city of Buckeye, though little has been revealed
since its announcement.
Another company, Telensa, has

globally deployed more than 2M
smart street lights across 400
cities that have saved cities up
to 30% in energy costs.
Telensa street light.

BIG TECH
In addition to its Azure platform, Microsoft’s work on smart city
tech extends to the CityNext initiative, which aggregates solutions
across 5 categories: digitization, education, health, safety, and
sustainability. The initiative is working on solutions for everything
from parking management to traffic optimization to digital patrol,
and more.
Snapshot of Microsoft’s Parking Management solution.
Sidewalk Labs — the urban innovation subsidiary of Alphabet,

Google’s parent company — made a splash in 2017 when it
announced that it was working on turning 800 acres of Toronto’s
waterfront into an advanced smart city. Dubbed Quayside, this
city-within-a-city would have had features such as dedicated
self-driving car lanes, smart street lights, public Wi-Fi hubs, real-
time transportation & parking information for the public, adaptable
buildings, and other cutting-edge innovations designed to improve
quality of life and increase sustainability. However, the project
was shuttered in May 2020 in the wake of Covid-19 and
regulatory uncertainty.

Amazon Web Services (AWS), a subsidiary of Amazon, offers a
broad set of cloud-based products for smart cities, including IoT
sensors and devices, management tools, storage, databases,
analytics, and more. These technologies are used for a wide
range of applications, including water quality monitoring, remote
patient monitoring for healthcare providers, flood detection,
snow level monitoring, smart analytics for transportation, public
transportation applications, and more.
For instance, AWS has a software platform called PARK SMART

that uses video sensors to provide real-time parking information
via a mobile app.
GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE)
has established a global initiative called United Smart Cities (USC),
which is now integrated into the United for Smart Sustainable
Cities Implementation Program. USC provides cities with support
to develop smarter and more sustainable urban solutions by
collaborating with international organizations, companies,
governments, and high-level decision makers. It currently has the
support of 17 UN agencies.

The USC platform is helping cities all over the world in the
transition to become smart cities, from Barcelona all the way to
districts in East Java, Indonesia.
It does this by first evaluating a city to determine its performance

in sustainability. It provides advisory services to help a city decide
which areas to focus on and assists in creating a tailor-made
action plan for each city. USC then gives funding support while
also assisting in partnerships between the public and private
sectors to help cities develop and attain their goals.
Seoul, one of the pioneers in this space, remains one of the top
smart cities in the world. One of the major problems that it’s
addressed is what to do with waste.
Landfills were the predominant means of managing waste until the

1990s, when Seoul introduced resource recovery facilities. These
transform waste into energy by incinerating solid urban waste at
up to 950°C, allowing them to harness the heat from the process to
use as an another source of energy.
Source: Gangnam Resource Recovery Facility via World Bank

The Indian government launched the Smart Cities Mission,
which aims to develop 100 smart cities across the country. The
government will grant selected smart cities funding to implement
smart city tech between 2018 and 2022.
Selected cities plan to show results from 2022 onwards.
In the city of Jaipur, for example, the Indian government is

assisting with the deployment of air quality monitoring technology
to create “mega data” that will be accessible by citizens through
a mobile app. Smart parking management technology was
implemented across Madhya Pradesh, where sensors and cameras
will collect data on parking lot capacity, though the program has
recently run into cash flow issues.
In 2018, the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, launched a roadmap

to make London the “smartest city in the world,” called Smarter
London Together.
This city-wide initiative intends to harness London’s tech talent

in collaboration with the capital’s boroughs and public service
sectors to improve sustainability and quality of life within London.
These projects range from increasing public Wi-Fi availability to
deploying “smart parks” that gather data on microclimates and
air quality. The city has put together a report card that anyone can
access via Trello.

London’s efforts are paying off: It was rated the number one smart
city government in the world in a joint report by Eden Strategy
Institute and OXD in 2018.
In November 2020, the first Southeast Asia-based smart cities

development lab opened in Singapore, bringing together a variety
of smart city solutions providers. The Smart Urban Co-Innovation
Lab has already struck partnerships with companies like AWS,
Cisco, and Johnson Controls, and is looking to partner with 200
local companies over the next 3 years.

Challenges and criticisms
The smart technology that gets implemented in cities has

the potential to provide tremendous cost savings — in fact,
an estimated $5T per year could be saved by governments,
enterprises, and citizens throughout an aggregated 75 smart cities
by 2022, according to a study by ABI Research.
However, cities need to first invest large amounts of money into

these projects before they start paying off. Lack of proper funding
is a large barrier that is keeping many cities from moving toward
implementing smart technology.
Moreover, building the new infrastructure for smart cities is a

complex process that takes years to complete. Thorough research
is required before making such large and costly decisions,
especially because each city must develop its own unique plan of
action. The right smart solutions for a city in Nigeria, for example,
would look very different from a city in Japan.
Some criticisms have also been made about potential downsides

a smart city could pose.
Since smart cities rely on acquiring, recording, and analyzing

data, there are concerns surrounding the privacy of citizens. The
governmental bodies that aggregate all this information must use
transparent practices to help assure the public that their data is
not being misused. Should a corrupt government misuse the data
it has on its citizens (like selling it to third parties), this would be a
huge invasion of privacy. Therefore, city governments must have
rigorous privacy protections in place that are known to the public.

There is also potential for public data to get stolen by hackers,
which could be a large threat to the safety and security of
individuals, governing bodies, and even the city itself. If smart
technology is not securely encrypted or is without strong security
protections, a hacker could manipulate devices around the city.
For example, someone could hack into smart traffic lights, take
control, and turn them all red. This would wreak havoc on a city,
as cars would inevitably begin running the red lights, resulting
in accidents, while emergency vehicles such as police and
ambulances would be prevented from getting to their destinations.
A security researcher actually proved this was possible in
Washington DC when he successfully hacked the system himself.
Putting high priority on strong security systems will be essential for

smart cities, or else such vulnerabilities may leave them exposed to
all manner of potentially catastrophic and costly events.

Conclusion
The development and implementation of smart technology

systems throughout cities around the world is an inevitable trend
to help cities become more efficient and sustainable.
There remains a long road ahead, as new infrastructure must be

built and technological innovations must be perfected before they
can go live. Yet, there are already aspects of smart technology
systems in place and working successfully in many cities around
the world, as witnessed in several countries’ responses to
Covid-19.
With some of the biggest companies, organizations, and

governments working together to invest in and develop smart
cities, we can expect to see urban areas continue to evolve and
transform over time.

Additional reading
This report was created with data from CB Insights’ emerging

technology insights platform, which offers clarity into emerging
tech and new business strategies through tools like:
• Earnings Transcripts Search Engine & Analytics to get an

information edge on competitors’ and incumbents’ strategies
• Patent Analytics to see where innovation is happening next
• Company Mosaic Scores to evaluate startup health, based on

our National Science Foundation-backed algorithm
• Business Relationships to quickly see a company’s

competitors, partners, and more
• Market Sizing Tools to visualize market growth and spot the

next big opportunity
If you aren’t already a client, sign up for a free trial to learn more
about our platform.

Life Cycle Assessment
of
Katerra’s Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT)

and Catalyst Building
Final Report
November 2019
Prepared for
Katerra
by the
Carbon Leadership Forum
and the
Center for International Trade in Forest Products
at the
LCA OF KATERRA’S CLT AND CATALYST BUILDING CARBON LEADERSHIP FORUM, CINTRAFOR
FINAL REPORT UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
Authors
The Carbon Leadership Forum in the AND The Center for International Trade in Forest
Department of Architecture, University of Products in the School of Environmental and
Washington: Forest Sciences, University of Washington:
 Kate Simonen, AIA, SE, Associate  Indroneil Ganguly, Ph.D., Associate

Professor (PI) Professor (Co-PI)
 Monica Huang, EIT, MSCE,  Francesca Pierobon, Ph.D., Research
Research Engineer Associate
 Cindy X. Chen, Ph.D., Research Associate
Acknowledgments
The research team would like to thank Hans-Erik Blomgren of Katerra for his role in initiating this
research study and fostering collaboration between Katerra and the University of Washington.
This research work was funded by Katerra.
Citations
Huang, M., Chen, C.X., Pierobon, F., Ganguly, I., Simonen, K. (2019). Life Cycle Assessment of Katerra’s
Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) and Catalyst Building: Final Report.
Copyright
The Life Cycle Assessment of Katerra’s Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) and Catalyst Building: Final Report
is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
NOVEMBER 2019
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Goal and scope.............................................................................................................................................. 5
Goal ........................................................................................................................................................... 5
Scope ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
CLT ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Building scope ..................................................................................................................................... 10
Methodology............................................................................................................................................... 16
Life cycle assessment .............................................................................................................................. 16
CLT ........................................................................................................................................................... 16
Lumber production ............................................................................................................................. 17
Data collection .................................................................................................................................... 17
Lumber inputs and delivery ................................................................................................................ 20
CLT manufacturing .............................................................................................................................. 20
Resin input .......................................................................................................................................... 21
Energy Input ........................................................................................................................................ 21
Life cycle impact assessment .............................................................................................................. 23
Catalyst Building...................................................................................................................................... 24
Material quantities and LCA data ....................................................................................................... 24
Operational energy ............................................................................................................................. 32
Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 34
CLT ........................................................................................................................................................... 34
Baseline model .................................................................................................................................... 34
Conservative model ............................................................................................................................ 35
Contribution analysis .......................................................................................................................... 37
NOVEMBER 2019
Catalyst Building...................................................................................................................................... 40
All impact categories, life cycle stage A .............................................................................................. 41
GWP detailed results, life cycle stage A .............................................................................................. 43
Carbon storage .................................................................................................................................... 49
Operational energy ............................................................................................................................. 50
Discussion.................................................................................................................................................... 52
Hot spots and opportunities for improvement ...................................................................................... 52
CLT ....................................................................................................................................................... 52
Catalyst Building.................................................................................................................................. 53
Comparison to other buildings ............................................................................................................... 54
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 58
References .................................................................................................................................................. 60
NOVEMBER 2019
Introduction
Katerra has developed its own cross-laminated timber (CLT) manufacturing facility in Spokane Valley,
Washington. This 25,100 m2 (270,000 ft2) factory is the largest CLT manufacturing facility in the world,
and is capable of producing approximately 187,000 m3 of CLT per year. Katerra has also established a
vertically integrated supply chain to provide the wood for the CLT factory. Production started in summer
of 2019.
Katerra commissioned the Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF) and Center for International Trade in Forest
Products (CINTRAFOR) at the University of Washington to analyze the environmental impacts of its CLT
as well as the Catalyst Building in Spokane, Washington. The Catalyst is a 15,690 m2 (168,800 ft2), five-
story office building that makes extensive use of CLT as a structural and design element. Jointly
developed by Avista and McKinstry, Katerra largely designed and constructed the building, and used CLT
produced by Katerra’s new factory. Performing a life cycle assessment (LCA) on Katerra’s CLT will allow
Katerra to explore opportunities for environmental impact reduction along their supply chain and
improve their CLT production efficiency. Performing an LCA on the Catalyst Building will enable Katerra
to better understand life cycle environmental impacts of mass timber buildings and identify
opportunities to optimize environmental performance of mid-rise CLT structures.
The goal, scope, methodology, and results of this analysis are detailed in this report.
Goal and scope
The goal and scope of the LCA are described in this section.
Goal
The goal of this life cycle assessment (LCA) is to understand the environmental impacts of Katerra’s
newly-established CLT supply chain and manufacturing facility, and highlight “hot-spots” or
opportunities for impact reduction. To do so, the research team performed the following activities:
 The CINTRAFOR research team performed an LCA of Katerra’s CLT manufacturing facility, which
was located in Spokane Valley, Washington, taking into account the geographic origin of the
lumber, which was from British Columbia, Canada. The research time analyzed the LCA results
to identify “hot-spots” of environmental impact along the supply chain.
NOVEMBER 2019 5
 The CLF research team performed a whole building LCA (WBLCA) of a new mass timber building
that was largely designed and constructed by Katerra. This building, named the Catalyst
Building, is located in Spokane, Washington was under construction at the time of authoring this
report. The research team analyzed the LCA results to identify “hot-spots” of environmental
impact in the building.
o At the request of Katerra, this case study assumed that all of the CLT in the building was
produced at Katerra’s CLT supply chain/factory, but in reality, only the 5-ply floor panels
on this project were produced by Katerra. Structurlam provided the 3-ply CLT for the
cladding and the 7-ply CLT for the CLT shear walls because the Katerra production
facility had not ramped up yet to produce 3-ply and 7-ply CLT in time for the Catalyst
project schedule.
o As a part of the WBLCA, the CLF research team also performed a comparison of the
preliminary vs final design of the enclosure and the accompanying energy use intensity
(EUI).
Five environmental impact measures were assessed and characterized using the Tool for the Reduction
and Assessment of Chemical and other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) 2.1. Primary energy
consumption was also assessed. These impact measures and their accompanying units of measurement
are:
1. Global warming potential (GWP) in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (kg CO2e)
2. Acidification potential (AP) in kilograms of sulfur dioxide equivalent (kg SO2e)
3. Eutrophication potential (EP) in kilograms of nitrogen equivalent (kg Ne)
4. Ozone depletion potential (ODP) in kilograms of trichlorofluoromethane (CFC11) equivalent (kg
CFC11e)
5. Smog formation potential (SFP) in kilograms of ozone equivalent (kg O3e)
6. Primary energy consumption (MJ)
The later in-depth analysis of the results focused on global warming potential (GWP), since this is the
key impact measure of concern in the building industry.
The results of this study are intended for use by the internal Katerra team. The results are also
tentatively intended to be released to the public at the discretion of Katerra.
NOVEMBER 2019 6
A third-party review will not be performed since the results of this study are not intended for use in
comparative assertions. This means that these results cannot be definitely compared with other whole
building LCAs to determine if one or the other is “better” or “worse”
The goal of the whole building LCA can be captured by a framework that is being developed as a part of
ongoing efforts to standardize building LCA reporting, also referred to as an “LCA taxonomy.” The goal
portion LCA taxonomy is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. LCA taxonomy goal description.
LCA taxonomy Project information

Assessment goal
• Intended application To understand the environmental impacts of Katerra’s
CLT manufacturing supply chain, and the
environmental impact of the Catalyst building.
• Reasons for carrying out the study To help Katerra reduce its environmental impacts.
• Intended audience Internal Katerra team.
• Whether results are intended to be used in No comparative assertions will be made
comparative assertions
Background information on assessment
General information on LCA
• Date of LCA assessment November 2019
• Assessment stage: Project phase at Construction phase
time of LCA assessment
• Client for assessment Katerra
• Name and qualification of LCA • Kate Simonen, AIA, LEED, PE, SE (PI)
assessor • Indroneil Ganguly, Ph.D. (Co-PI)
• Francesca Pierobon, Ph.D.
• Monica Huang, EIT, MSCE
• Cindy X. Chen, Ph.D.
• Organization of assessor The Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF) and Center for
International Trade of Forest Products (CINTRAFOR) at
the University of Washington (UW)
Verification Verification not performed
LCA data and methods
• Source, type, and quality of LCA data • For CLT LCA: SimaPro v9 (2019). See Table 4 for
(reference date) additional information.
• For case study building: Athena 5.2 (2016) and a few
EPDs
• LCA impacts and assessment method • Characterization method: TRACI 2.1
including version number and • LCA impacts assessed:
reference o Global warming potential (GWP) in kilograms of
carbon dioxide equivalent (kg CO2e)
NOVEMBER 2019 7

o Acidification potential (AP) in kilograms of
sulfur dioxide equivalent (kg SO2e)
o Eutrophication potential (EP) in kilograms of
nitrogen equivalent (kg Ne)
o Ozone depletion potential (ODP) in kilograms of
trichlorofluoromethane (CFC11) equivalent (kg
CFC11e)
o Smog formation potential (SFP) in kilograms of
ozone equivalent (kg O3e)
o Primary energy consumption (MJ)
Assumptions and scenarios
• HVAC, natural ventilation and HVAC and daylighting – yes. Natural ventilation – no.
daylight simulation performed
• Source, type, and quality of The material quantities were provided by Katerra. This
building data information is considered to be highly accurate.
• BIM model available (Y/N) Yes, but not currently used in this study
Scope
The scopes of the CLT LCA and the building LCA are described separately in this section. Each subsection
herein describes the life cycle stages and physical system boundaries in each analysis.
CLT
CLT panels manufactured at the Katerra facility are produced with 3-ply, 5-ply, 7-ply, and 9-ply layups,
providing a catalog of panel types that can be specified for a specific design application. The first layup
type being manufactured are 5-ply master panels 6.60 inches in total thickness and approximately 60
feet in length and 10 feet in width. The wood species combination used for the CLT panels being
investigated in this project is spruce-pine-fir (SPF), which has a bone-dry density of 420 kg/m3. Future
plans for production can include panels ranging from 3.24 inches in total thickness for 3-ply, up to 12.42
inches in thickness for 9-ply. The LCA model is based on a functional unit of 1 m3 of CLT panel.
The life cycle scope of this analysis includes:
 A1: Forestry operation and lumber production

 A2: Transportation from sawmills to CLT manufacturing facility
 A3: Onsite CLT manufacturing
Figure 1 outlines the processes involved in the CLT production system, i.e. the system boundary of the
analysis. The system being evaluated begins at the resources extraction phase and ends at the exit point
NOVEMBER 2019 8
of the manufacturing facility. The final impacts modeled are based on the input and output data for
energy and materials. Emissions from fossil fuel are accounted for in the final results, while biogenic
carbon from biomass-based fuels is not included in the results. A detailed description associated with
biogenic carbon and carbon storage is included in the section “Results” > “Catalyst Building” > “Carbon
storage.”
Figure 1. System boundary for CLT production.
NOVEMBER 2019 9
Building scope
The life cycle scope of the building LCA includes:
 Stage A: Product and construction process stages

o A1: Raw material extraction
o A2: Transportation of materials from material supply to the manufacturing facility
o A3: Product and material processing/manufacturing
o A4: Transportation of materials from manufacturing facility to the building site
o A5: Construction and installation
 Stage B: Use stage
o B6: Operational energy use only
 Stage D: Benefits and loads beyond the system boundary
o Biogenic carbon storage only
For reference, Figure 2 presents the standard life cycle stages of a building based on EN 15978 and ISO
21930.
This study did not evaluate the impacts of materials in life cycle stage B (such as use and maintenance
during building life) and stage C (such as demolition and disposal at end-of-life) because the data for
these stages tend to be highly uncertain and hypothetical, and not enough information about these life
cycle stages for this building were available at the time of the analysis.
NOVEMBER 2019 10
Figure 2. Standard building life cycle stages from Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings: A Practice Guide based on
EN 15978 and ISO 21930 (Carbon Leadership Forum 2018).
NOVEMBER 2019 11
The physical building scope was limited to core and shell (structure and enclosure) only. Interior fit-out
and tenant improvements, i.e. interior finishes and interior partitions, were not included. The physical
building scope is detailed in Table 2.
Table 2. LCA building scope
Sub- CSI
Category category Item Material code Comments / additional info
Structure Gravity Beams and Glulam (SPF) 061813 -
system columns
Columns Glulam (AYC) 061816 Exterior columns
Slabs CLT (SPF) 061719 5-Ply CLT, 6.6in thick
GLT (SPF) 061813 GLT "ribs"
Steel 051200 End rib connections
Topping slab Gypcrete 035319 2in Maxxon
Acoustic Gypcrete 090571 Maxxon
underlayment
Connections Steel 051200 Just for glulam columns and
beams
Girders Steel 051200 Steel box beams at atrium
area Level 3
Fireproofing Intumescent paint 078123 1hr fire rating for steel girders.
paint Class A flame spread
FlameControl Paint in
Concealed Spaces
Lateral BRBs Grout 051200 Cement grout fill
system Steel 051200 BRB incl. gusset plates.
Shear walls CLT (SPF) 061719 7-ply
Foundation Column footings Concrete (4000 psi) 033130 -
Rebar 032000 -
Mat foundation Concrete (4000 psi) 033140 -
Rebar 032000 -
Subgrade Slab-on-grade Concrete (3000 psi) 033030 -
Rebar 032000 -
Slab-on-grade Crushed rock 312300 -
underlayment
Subgrade Concrete (4000 psi) 033130 -
columns Rebar 032000 -
Subgrade walls Concrete (4000 psi) 033170 Partial basement
and footings Rebar 032000 -
Suspended slabs Concrete (5000 psi) 033800 PT-deck
Rebar 032000 -
PT steel 032000 -
NOVEMBER 2019 12
Sub- CSI
Category category Item Material code Comments / additional info
Enclosure Wall Exterior glazing Glazing 088000 Triple-pane
Exterior mullions Aluminum 084413 Storefront mullions
Insulation Mineral wool board 072100 3" mineral wool board,
Rockwool Comfortboard 80
Exterior wall CLT (SPF) 074223 1. 3-ply (4.125in thick) CLT
panels
Air barrier Polypropylene fabric 072500 2. Self-Adhered Water
with proprietary Resistive Air Barrier:
adhesive Vaproshield Wrap SA
Insulated panel Steel and insulation 072100 3. Kingspan Karrier Panel
Carrier rails Aluminum 072100 4. Karrier horizontal aluminum
hat channel
Hat channels Galvanized steel 074229 5. Terracotta vertical rail
support
Finish Terra cotta 074229 Rainscreen with support
fastening system
Prefinished steel 074213 Prefinished steel
panel
Modified wood 097200 Accoya Acetylated Wood
finish
Roof Roof CLT CLT (SPF) 074123 1. CLT roof structure. 5-ply
Underlayment Modified bitumen 075200 2. Self-adhered roofing
membrane membrane underlayment membrane
(WIP 300HT)
Insulation build- Polyiso foam 072200 3. Insulation build-up
up insulation including tapered top
(Hunter). 8"+taper
Adhesive Polyurethane 075423 4. Adhesive (Fast-Dual
Cartridge)
TPO membrane 075423 6. TPO adhesive (Sure-Weld)
Rigid board Glass mat gypsum 072113 5. USG Securerock rigid board
panel
Waterproofing SBS membrane 075400 7. Originally TPO membrane
(Carlisle Syntec), then
replaced with 2-ply SBS
Subgrade Insulation Extruded 072113 2in rigid (R-10)
polystyrene
Waterproofing Geotextile 071700 Bentonite geotextile w/
integrated poly liner
NOVEMBER 2019 13
As a summary, the LCA scope of the whole building LCA is captured by the LCA taxonomy in Table 3.
Table 3. LCA taxonomy scope description.

Project information
• Project name Catalyst Building
• Project type Office
• Project architect, engineer, and/or contractor Katerra (Architect and Contractor), MGA Consulting
Architect, KPFF Structural, McKinstry MEP
• Project owner, developer, and/or manager Catalyst Spokane
• Project construction cost N/A
• Rating scheme None. Passive-House in practice with a net zero
target.
• Rating achieved According to McKinstry, the Catalyst Building is
intended to be a zero-energy building (link), though
the current, calculated EUI is not yet zero.
• Year of building construction completion TBD 2020
• Year of building commissioning TBD
• Year of occupancy TBD 2020
• Year of refurbishment Not applicable
Functional unit
Building scale and performance
Area characteristics
• Building footprint area Approximately 33,760 SF (3,138 m2)
• Total gross floor area (GFA) 168,805 SF (15,690 m2)
• Parking lot size Not applicable
Height characteristics
• Average ceiling height 14ft – 0in (office levels)
• Building total height 70ft – 0in
• Number of stories above grade 5
• Number of stories below grade 1 (for 1/2 of building due to sloped sight)
Relevant technical and functional requirements
• Building use type(s) Office, Educational
• Building occupancy type (B) Business
• Design number of building occupants 2393. However, this does not reflect the increase in
occupants at Level 3 (Eastern Washington University
is adding classrooms).
• Design life expectancy in years N/A
• Structural type (per IBC) Mass Timber gravity and lateral systems. Type IV
Heavy Timber.
NOVEMBER 2019 14

Geographic and site characteristics
• Climate zone (per IECC) IECC climate zone 5B (2015 International Energy
Conservation Code 2016)
• Landscaping description N/A
Location – address
• Location - Street address 601 E. Riverside Avenue
• Location - city Spokane
• Location - state/province Washington
• Location - country United States
Life cycle scope
Reference study period (RSP) N/A
Life cycle stages  Life cycle stage A, which includes:
o A1: Raw material extraction
o A2: Transportation from material
extraction site to manufacturing facility
o A3: Manufacturing
o A4: Transportation from manufacturing
facility to building site
o A5: Construction-installation process
 Life cycle stage B:
o B6: Operational energy use only
 Life cycle stage D:
o Biogenic carbon only
System boundary
Building scope per Omniclass or RICS Professional See Table 2.
Statement
NOVEMBER 2019 15
Methodology
This section details the analysis methodology for the LCA of 1) Katerra’s CLT and 2) the Catalyst Building.
Life cycle assessment
LCA is a tool for evaluating the environmental aspects

of a product throughout its entire life cycle. A product’s
life cycle stages may include raw material extraction,
manufacturing/processing, usage, and disposal. LCA is
generally based on the standards provided by ISO
14040 and ISO 14044 (ISO 2006a; ISO 2006b). Several
required phases are included in the LCA model based
on these standards: goal and scope definition, inventory
analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation. These
phases are diagrammed in Figure 3, which includes
“Report Results” as a fifth phase.
In general, an LCA takes into account the energy and Figure 3. The four phases of a LCA from Life
Cycle Assessment of Buildings: A Practice
material inputs and outputs over a production process Guide, based on ISO 14040 (Carbon Leadership
Forum 2018).
and evaluates the impacts based on primary or
secondary data. Primary data often involves first-hand data collection through surveys, observations,
and experiments specifically designed for the context of the study. An example of primary data may
include collecting the amount of electricity or water used to manufacture a product at the production
facility.
CLT
This section describes the methods for data collection and analysis for the CLT supply chain and
manufacturing process. The data used in this study included primary and secondary data. This section
describes the source and types of data collected.
The CLT LCA analysis includes two main phases: lumber production and CLT manufacturing. Lumber
production includes forestry operation and lumber manufacturing. Forestry operations include energy
and fuel input associated with planting and harvesting.
NOVEMBER 2019 16
Lumber production
Lumber used for CLT laminations manufacturing at the Katerra facility comes from Canadian sawmills
and consists of a mix of spruce-pine-fire (SPF) wood species combination. The environmental impacts of
lumber production were modeled based on a 2018 LCA report for surfaced dried softwood lumber
published by the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (Athena Sustainable Materials Institute 2018).
Data associated with the raw material input, energy consumption, and transportation were based on
the data described in the softwood lumber LCA and with the use of different life cycle inventory
databases. Since the density of lumber directly affects the impacts of transportation, the impacts
resulting from lumber transportation described in the Canadian lumber LCA were scaled using the wood
density appropriate for the lumber used at the Katerra facility. All other factors remained unchanged.
Table 4 shows the components of lumber production, the sources of the inventory data, and the regions
they cover.
Table 4. Sources of inventory data for lumber production.
Component Source Region

USLCI, with transportation distance modified based
Logs U.S. Northwest
on the Canadian lumber LCA (Laboratory 2012)
Plastic Strap 2018 DATASMART LCI Package (LTS 2019) North America
Steel Strap Industry Data (worldsteel 2018) Global
Packaging 2018 DATASMART LCI Package (LTS 2019) North America
Electricity Ecoinvent 3.5 (ecoinvent 2019) Canada
Diesel 2018 DATASMART LCI Package (LTS 2019) North America
Propane 2018 DATASMART LCI Package (LTS 2019) North America
Natural Gas 2018 DATASMART LCI Package (LTS 2019) North America
Hydraulic Fluid, lubricants,
2018 DATASMART LCI Package (LTS 2019) North America
motor oil
Waste Ecoinvent 3.5 (ecoinvent 2019) Global
Transportation USLCI (Laboratory 2012) North America
Data collection
Data associated with the production of CLT were collected through surveys, in-person discussions, and a
factory site visit to Katerra’s CLT manufacturing facility in Spokane Valley, WA. At startup, the facility is
running at a lower capacity but is projected to quickly increase production. Thus, to account for future
increased production capacity, data used in the analysis were based on the assumption of the facility
running at 85% of its full capacity and produces 187,000 m3 of CLT panels. Data collected included
NOVEMBER 2019 17
production capacity, manufacturing process, energy and material inputs, source of raw materials,
logistics, and future production plans. Raw data were collected, organized, and computed for use in the
LCA model. Additional data associated with transportation and production of materials such as resin
and lumber were obtained from existing life cycle inventory databases. Figure 4 through Figure 8
contain photos taken onsite at the CLT manufacturing facility, showing the interior and assembly line
operations inside the facility.
Figure 4. Interior of the manufacturing facility.
NOVEMBER 2019 18
Figure 5. Interior of the kiln for lumber drying Figure 6. Lumber sorting line
Figure 7. CLT panel after layup, glue Figure 8. Finished panel packaging and
application, and pressing transportation
NOVEMBER 2019 19
Lumber inputs and delivery
The lumber used in the study comes from three different sawmills. One of the sawmills (Radium)
provided 70% of the lumber, while the other two provided the remaining 30% of lumber. Rounded-edge
lumber is purchased by the CLT manufacturing facility at the current stage. The average moisture
content of the purchased lumber was assumed to be 19%. Depending on the moisture content of the
purchased lumbers, the lumber is re-dried in the onsite kiln to 12±3% moisture content. Table 5 shows
the lumber inputs to CLT manufacturing. The lumber infeed amount is based on the oven-dried weight.
Table 5. Lumber inputs. “tkm” = metric ton-kilometer. “odkg” = oven-dry kilogram
Component Sawmill Units Quantity per m3 of CLT

Lumber Infeed - m3 1.19
- odkg 500
Lumber Delivery Radium (70%) tkm 148
Elko (15%) tkm 26
Wynnwood (15%) tkm 16
CLT manufacturing
CLT manufacturing involves several key phases, including lumber preparation, finger jointing, layup, and
adhesive application, pressing, and panel finishing. Multiple steps are involved in each key process
during manufacturing and each step requires inputs such as fuel and electricity. For example, lumber
preparation involves lumber selection, drying, grouping, cutting, etc. and requires different equipment
to kiln-dry and cut the lumber. Table 6 shows the amount of materials and co-products included in the
declared unit of 1 m3 of CLT panel. The mass of the CLT produced at the Katerra facility has a specific
gravity (SG) of 0.42 on an oven-dry basis, giving the final product an oven-dry mass of 424.52 kg/m3,
including both the wood and resin portions. Co-products from the manufacturing processes, including
shavings, trimmings, and sawdust, were estimated based on the amount of daily waste generation,
which accounts for approximately 16% of every m3 of CLT manufactured.
NOVEMBER 2019 20
Table 6. Products and co-products associated with CLT manufacturing. “odkg” = oven-dry kilograms.
Category Product Units Quantity per m3 of CLT

Primary Product CLT m3 1
odkg 424.52
Wood Portion odkg 420
Resin (Resin + Primer + Hardener) kg 4.52
Co-Products odkg 80
Total kg 504.52
Resin input
Resin inputs depend on the thickness and number of plys of the CLT panel. Currently, 5-ply CLT panels
with a finished thickness of 6.60 inches are being manufactured at the Katerra facility, and therefore,
the numbers shown in Table 7 are based on the resin requirement for 5-ply panels. Two types of resins
are used: Polyurethane (PUR) and Melamine Formaldehyde (MF). MF resin is used for finger jointing,
and PUR is used for face-bonding applied during layup. MF resin (#4720) is manufactured in Oregon,
while PUR resin (#HBX102) and primer are manufactured in Illinois.
Table 7. Resin inputs for CLT manufacturing.
Resin input Units Quantity per m3 of CLT

Melamine Formaldehyde (MF) – finger joint kg 0.72
Hardener – finger joint kg 0.24
Polyurethane (PUR) – layup kg 3.06
Primer - layup kg 0.5
MF Transport tkm 0.55
PUR Transport (Truck) tkm 8.99
Primer Transport (Truck) tkm 1.47
Energy Input
The main energy input for CLT manufacturing is electricity. An onsite kiln is operated using natural gas,
while onsite transportation such as forklifts use propane and diesel fuel. All other machinery used for
onsite CLT manufacturing are operated using electricity. The electricity inputs of the equipment were
calculated based on the power and percent run time. For example, given that a finger joint score saw
NOVEMBER 2019 21
ran 100% of the time with a motor power of 7.46 kW, the hourly energy consumption for this
equipment was calculated to be 6.34 kWh, assuming a 20-hour daily operation time at 85% mill capacity.
In this study, two models are considered:
1. Baseline model. The baseline model considers the processes and equipment that are known to
be currently in operation at the CLT facility and does not account for equipment or processes
that are possible additions for future CLT manufacturing
2. Conservative model. The conservative model accounts for all current and possible future
additional equipment. The conservative model considers a “worst-case” scenario, meaning that
a 100% machine run time is assumed for additional equipment that do not yet have a run time
scheduled.
The total energy input involved in each of the manufacturing processes under the baseline model is
shown in Table 8, and the energy input for the conservative model is shown in Table 9.
Table 8. The energy input for CLT manufacturing, baseline model.
Input Unit Quantity per m3 of CLT

Lumber infeed kWh 30.97
m of natural gas
3
2.6
Finger jointing kWh 17.79
kg of resin + hardener 0.96
Board sorting kWh 17.64
Layup and adhesive application kWh 1.15
kg of resin + primer 3.56
kg of primer 0.5
Pressing kWh 2.52
Panel finishing kWh 17.12
NOVEMBER 2019 22
Table 9. Energy input for CLT manufacturing, conservative model.
Input Unit Quantity per m3 of CLT

Lumber infeed kWh 35.58
m3 of natural gas 2.6
Finger jointing kWh 18.55
kg of resin + hardener 0.96
Board sorting kWh 30.2
Layup and adhesive application kWh 1.15
kg of resin + primer 3.56
kg of primer 0.5
Pressing kWh 6.19
Panel finishing kWh 37.83
Life cycle impact assessment
Inventory analysis is performed by incorporating the collected data and can be analyzed using a range of
software tools and models. For LCI analysis, SimaPro version 9 and the Tool for the Reduction and
Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) version 2.1 was used to model the
environmental impacts from the processes associated with CLT production. TRACI is a method
developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to estimate the environmental impacts of
a specific process system and is integrated in SimaPro (version 9). SimaPro is a software tool for
modeling production and processing systems from a life-cycle perspective based on the system flow
developed by the user. TRACI includes the five mandatory impact categories required for wood
products in North America (FPInnovations 2015): global warming, acidification, eutrophication, smog
formation, and ozone depletion. TRACI uses a number of impact indicators at different scales to present
the level of impact from a product’s life cycle. Although there are many available methods for inventory
analysis, TRACI was selected because it is designed specifically for the U.S., which makes it consistent
with the area of interest for this research. In addition, the Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) was used
to calculate the primary energy consumption. The CED calculation was based on data published by
Ecoinvent and was incorporated into SimaPro as an energy estimation method (Hischier et al. 2010; PRé
2019).
An LCA database contains measurements of material, energy, and environmental flows in and out of the
production system for a defined amount of product. Existing LCA databases that are commonly used in
NOVEMBER 2019 23
North America include the U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database (USLCI). The USLCI was developed by the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and contains individual accounting data of energy and
material flows associated with many production systems. The ecoinvent database was also used.
Catalyst Building
This section discusses the material quantity data and LCA data for the LCA of the Catalyst Building. The
LCA impacts for the Catalyst Building were calculated by 1) collecting material quantities, 2) collecting
LCA data for the materials, and 3) multiplying the material quantities with the LCA data. Operational
energy was also assessed separately.
Material quantities and LCA data
The CLF team provided a template (as an Excel file) to Katerra to fill in material quantities for the
Catalyst Building. After receiving the material descriptions and quantities, the CLF team collected LCA
data to match the materials used on the project. Some unit conversions were done in order to match
the quantity units to the LCA data units. The final material quantities and LCA data selection are shown
in Table 10.
The CLF team selected building LCA data primarily from the Athena Impact Estimator version 5.2, using
life cycle stage A (A1-A5) impacts only. Athena was selected to be the primary source of LCA because it
is a reputable source of LCA data specific to the building industry and North America. It is also free to
use and was developed by the same organization that developed the softwood lumber data used in the
study.
For some materials on the project, when a suitable material could not be found from the Athena
database, a similar substitute material was used. This was sometimes an alternate material from
Athena, sometimes from the Quartz database, which is an open-source, building-specific, North
American LCA database, and sometimes from an environmental product declaration (EPD). The specific
EPDs used in this study are shown in Table 10. When a suitable North American EPD could not be found,
a European EPD was used. However, the European EPDs used the CML characterization methodology
instead of TRACI 2.1, which meant that eutrophication and smog formation potential data could not be
used because they had units that did not match TRACI 2.1. In these instances, the eutrophication and
smog formation potential values were set to zero to avoid inflating the results in these categories. Some
EPDs only covered A1 – A3 instead of A1 – A5. These discrepancies are also indicated in Table 10. It
NOVEMBER 2019 24
should be noted that these “less-than-ideal” data sources (those using CML methodology or having life
cycle scope A1-A3) compromised only about 6% of the overall GWP impact of the building.
Table 10. Material quantities and LCA data sources for the Catalyst Building.
Sub- LCA data LCA material

Category category Item Material Quantity Units source name
Beams and Glulam (SPF) 1593 m3 Athena GluLam
Gravity system
Structure
columns Sections
Columns Glulam (AYC) 33 m3 Athena GluLam
Sections
Slab CLT (SPF) 2291 m3 CINTRA- Katerra CLT
FOR /
Athena
GLT (SPF) 573 m3 Athena GluLam
Sections
Steel 23.9 tonnes Athena Steel Plate
Topping slab Gypcrete 534 m3 Athena Lightweight
(modified) concrete
Acoustic Gypcrete 10519 m2 Athena Lightweight
underlayment (modified) concrete
Connections Steel 22.8 tonnes Athena Steel Plate
Girders Steel 41.2 tonnes Athena Hollow
Structural Steel
Fireproofing Intumescent 242 m2 EPD (CML, Hensotherm
paint paint A1-A3 Intumescent
only) Paint* (Rudolf
Hensel GmbH
2014)
BRBs Grout 4.3 tonnes Athena Portland
Lateral system
Cement
Steel 18.3 tonnes Athena Hollow
Structural Steel
Shear walls CLT (SPF) 430 m3 CINTRA- Katerra CLT
FOR /
Athena
Column Concrete 95 m3 Athena Concrete mix
Foundation
footings (4000 psi) #3

Rebar 4.2 tonnes Athena Rebar, Rod,
Light Sections
Mat foundation Concrete 471 m3 Athena Concrete mix
(4000 psi) #3
Light Sections
Slab-on-grade Concrete 353 m3 Athena Concrete mix
Sub-
grade
(3000 psi) #1
Light Sections
NOVEMBER 2019 25

Slab-on-grade Crushed rock 552 m3 Athena Coarse
underlayment Aggregate
Crushed Stone
Subgrade Concrete 20 m3 Athena Concrete mix
columns (4000 psi) #2
Light Sections
Subgrade walls Concrete 285 m3 Athena Concrete mix
and footings (4000 psi) #3
Light Sections
Suspended Concrete 287 m3 Athena Concrete mix
slabs (5000 psi) #5
Light Sections
PT steel 6.4 tonnes Athena PT steel
(modified)
Exterior glazing Glazing 2363 m2 Athena Triple Glazed
Wall
Enclosure
Soft Coated Air

Exterior Aluminum 2.3 tonnes Athena Aluminum
mullions Window Frame
Insulation Mineral wool 3383 m2 EPD (CML) Rockwool®
board Stone Wool
Insulation†
(Rockwool
North America
2019)
Exterior wall CLT (SPF) 3383 m2 CINTRA- Katerra CLT
FOR /
Athena
Air barrier Polypropylene 3383 m2 Athena Polypropylene
fabric with Scrim Kraft
proprietary Vapour
adhesive Retarder Cloth
Insulated panel Steel and 3383 m2 EPD Kingspan
proprietary Quadcore
insulation Insulated Metal
Panel (Kingspan
2019)
Carrier rails Aluminum 21.7 tonnes Athena Aluminum
Extrusion
Hat channels Galvanized 14.3 tonnes Athena Galvanized
steel Studs
Finish Terra cotta 2417 m2 Athena Clay Tile
Prefinished 1015 m2 Athena Galvanized
steel panel Sheet
Modified 474 m2 EPD (CML, Accoya®
wood finish A1-A3 Modified
only) Wood* (Accsys
NOVEMBER 2019 26

Technologies
PLC 2015)
Roof Roof CLT CLT (SPF) 2956 m2 CINTRA- Katerra CLT
FOR /
Athena
Underlayment Modified 2956 m2 Athena Modified
membrane bitumen Bitumen
membrane membrane
Insulation Polyiso foam 2956 m2 Athena Polyiso Foam
build-up insulation Board (unfaced)
Adhesive Polyurethane 2956 m2 Quartz Polyurethane
flooring
adhesive*
TPO 2956 m2 Athena GAF
membrane Everguard©
white TPO
membrane 80
mil
Rigid board Glass mat 2956 m2 Athena 5/8" Glass Mat
gypsum panel Gypsum Panel
Waterproofing SBS 2956 m2 EPD SBS-Modified
membrane Bitumen
Roofing
Membrane
(Asphalt
Roofing
Manufacturers
Association
2016)
Insulation Extruded 188 m3 Athena Extruded
Sub-
grade
polystyrene Polystyrene
Waterproofing Geotextile 174 m2 Athena 6mil
Polyethylene
* A4-A5 not covered
† Used CML characterization method, not TRACI 2.1
Out of the 47 materials considered in the building, only five used EPD data. By mass, only about 6% of
the data was based on EPDs. By GWP contribution, 10% of the data was based on EPDs, most of it
coming from the Kingspan steel insulated panel EPD.
Concrete LCA data were based on actual mix design submittals from the project. See the following
subsection “Concrete” for more information.
The specific deviations from using generic Athena data are:
NOVEMBER 2019 27
 CLT: The wood CLT data was provided by the CINTRAFOR team. Since the data extended only
from A1-A4, the CLF team used Athena’s data for Cross-Laminated Timber to fill in the data for
A5.
 Gypcrete: The research team could not find an EPD for Maxxon gypcrete. Product spec sheets
did not provide information about the compositional ratios. Therefore, gypcrete was
approximated as Athena’s Lightweight Concrete, modified to convert from Athena’s “block”
units to the volumetric units for gypcrete.
 Intumescent paint: Athena did not have an item for intumescent paint, and neither did Quartz.
The CLF team found two EPDs for intumescent paint, one by Amonn® (J.F. Amonn Srl - Color
Division Srl/GmbH 2019) and one by Rudolf Hensel GmbH (Rudolf Hensel GmbH 2014). Katerra
did not specify a particular brand of intumescent paint, therefore the CLF team picked the EPD
that had the slightly higher GWP value, which was the Rudolf Hensel brand (for the Amonn
brand, the GWP for steel coating was 2.4 kg CO2e/kg paint, life cycle stages A1-A4, while for the
Rudolf Hensel brand, the GWP was 2.5 kg CO2e/kg paint, life cycle stages A1-A3). The
conversion from weight of paint to area of coverage was found from the Amonn EPD, which
provided ranges of 200 – 1400 g paint/m2 of coverage (one as high as 4000), depending on the
receiving surface. For this study, the conversion was approximated as 1 kg paint / m2 of
coverage.
 PT steel: Pre-stressing steel was approximated to have double the impacts of that of Athena’s
regular rebar. This is a reasonable assumption, given that EPDs for pre-stressing steel have
GWP’s ranging from 1.0 – 2.7 kg CO2e/kg steel (Hjulsbro Steel AB 2016; Ferrometall AS 2015).
 Mineral wool board: The specific product used on the project was Rockwool Comfortboard 80,
which was a rigid mineral wool product. Athena had mineral wool (“MW”), which was assumed
to be its most common form of batt insulation, but it had nothing specifically described as
mineral wool board. Therefore, a Rockwool mineral wool board EPD was found and used to
represent mineral wool board.
 Insulated metal panel: Athena had an insulated metal panel item in its database, but its GWP
value was suspiciously large (orders of magnitude larger than that of the actual product used in
the building), therefore an EPD for the actual product was used instead. Two EPDs for Kingspan
NOVEMBER 2019 28
Karrier panels were available from the Kingspan Certifications website1 – 1) an SIP panel, which
had polyisocyanurate insulation and was described as being the more standard option, and 2) a
Quadcore option, which seemed more technologically advanced. The Quadcore option was
selected for this study because it had the slightly higher GWP value, making it a slightly more
conservative choice.
 Modified wood finish: The modified wood finish/cladding used in the building was Accoya
Acetylated Wood. There was no matching item for this in Athena, but there was an EPD for the
specific product (Accsys Technologies PLC 2015). However, this EPD presented negative GWP
values, which was inconsistent with TRACI and Athena’s methodology for representing GWP of
biogenic carbon. Therefore, a separate Accoya cradle-to-gate carbon footprint LCA report was
consulted for non-negative GWP values (Trueman 2012). Both sources provided results for
multiple wood species, but the wood species did not overlap between the two sources. In the
end, the GWP impact was based on “Alder U.S.” from the LCA report, and all the other impacts
were based on “Radiata Pine” from the EPD (since the EPD did not have “Alder U.S.”).
 Polyurethane: For the roofing adhesive, the building used Carlisle Syntec’s FAST Dual Cartridge,
which is a two-component polyurethane adhesive. Athena did not have a polyurethane product
or an adhesive product in its database. Quartz did have “polyurethane flooring adhesive,” so its
data was used. The conversion from square meters (quantity measured) to kg (LCA data) was
performed using information from the Carlisle product spec sheet (Carlisle Syntec Systems
2018).
 SBS membrane: Athena did not have any SBS membranes in its database. It did have “modified
bitumen membrane,” which is similar to an SBS-modified bitumen membrane. However, the
impacts in Athena were given per kg of product, which would have required making
assumptions about quantity of product used per unit area. Therefore, it was deemed more
expedient and representative to use the industry-average EPD for SBS-Modified Bitumen
Roofing Membrane published by the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturer’s Association (Asphalt
Roofing Manufacturers Association 2016), which provided the impacts in the same units as the
material quantities (square meters).
1
https://www.kingspan.com/us/en-us/about-kingspan/kingspan-insulated-panels/certifications
NOVEMBER 2019 29
After the material quantities and LCA impact data selection were finalized, the material quantities were
multiplied with the LCA impact data to produce the overall building LCA impacts. The results were then
divided by the gross internal floor area of the building (15,690 m2) in order to normalize the impacts per
unit area, as is common in building LCAs. The results are presented in the “Results” section.
Concrete
Katerra was able to provide concrete mix submittals from the actual project. A description of these mix
designs from the submittals is shown in Table 11. The mixes are numbered 1 – 6 here for simplicity, and
correspond to the concrete mix designs in Table 10. Since the mix designs were not categorized in
exactly the same way as the concrete quantity data, the research team made some assumptions in
assigning the mix designs to the concrete quantity data. In cases where there was some uncertainty, the
research team selected the more conservative (higher GWP) mix design option for the building
component. The building components assumed for each mix design is shown in Table 11. As a result of
these assumptions, two mix designs were not used in this analysis.
Table 11. Concrete mix design descriptions from project submittals and assumed building component.
Design
Concrete Mix Building concrete
mix # Mix Code Description Mix Usage component strength
1 313560 3500 PSI 3/ 4" INTERIOR MISC INTERIOR CONCRETE Slab-on- 3000 psi
& NON-EXPOSED INTERIOR SLABS ON grade
GRADE
2 314060 4000 PSI 3/ 4" INTERIOR COLUMNS & SHEAR WALLS Subgrade 4000 psi
columns
3 314066 4000 PSI 3/ 4" EXTERIOR BASEMENT WALLS, SPREAD Mat 4000 psi
FOOTINGS, MAT FOUNDATIONS, foundation
EXTERIOR SLABS ON GRADE, SITE
WALLS & MISC. EXTERIOR CONCRETE
4 315060 5000 PSI 3/ 4" INTERIOR MILD REINFORCED SLABS Not assigned N/A
AND BEAMS (N/A)
5 320250 5000 PSI 3/ 4" INTERIOR, WRA, HRWRA P/ T SLALS Suspended 5000 psi
AND BEAMS slabs
6 315061 5000 PSI 3/ 4" INTERIOR SRA EXPOSED INTERIOR N/A N/A
SLABS ON GRADE
These mix designs were entered into Athena’s custom concrete mix design module (the “User Defined
Concrete Mix Design Library”), using the percentage contributions from each material by weight. The
admixtures were ignored because they were a negligible percentage of the overall mass and because
NOVEMBER 2019 30
Athena did not have LCA data for admixtures. A sample screenshot of the mix design data entry is
shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9. Sample mix design data entry into Athena’s Concrete Mix Design module.
These percentage contributions in each of the mixes are summarized in Table 12, along with the weight
per cubic meter and the global warming potential result from Athena.
Table 12. Concrete mix percentages by weight, total density, and resulting GWP from Athena’s concrete mix
design tool.
Concrete mix percentage contributions by weight Concrete

Fine Coarse Grand density GWP (kg
# Cement Slag aggregate aggregate Water total (tonnes/m3) CO2e/m3)
1 10.8% 2.7% 32.9% 46.8% 6.8% 100% 1.79 259
2 11.7% 2.9% 32.3% 46.5% 6.6% 100% 1.80 281
3 13.1% 3.2% 26.7% 49.7% 7.2% 100% 1.61 315
4 13.5% 2.4% 31.1% 46.8% 6.3% 100% 1.81 322
5 13.9% 2.5% 31.7% 45.5% 6.4% 100% 1.81 330
6 13.5% 2.3% 31.5% 46.4% 6.2% 100% 1.82 322
NOVEMBER 2019 31
Generally, the GWP impacts from the actual concrete mix designs were lower than that of Athena’s
regional Seattle concrete data. The Athena values for concrete strengths of 3000 – 5000 psi ranged
from 335 – 507 kg CO2e/m3, while the Catalyst concrete mixes ranged from 295 - 370 kg CO2e/m3.
Operational energy
The energy use intensity (EUI) for the final design of the building was provided by McKinstry as 22.4
kBTU/sf/year. The only mode of energy consumption was electricity; there were no other sources of
energy for this building (e.g. no gas, no renewable energy).
eGrid2010 (US EPA 2010) was used to estimate the GWP of electricity consumption for this building.
Although a more recent of eGrid (version 2016) was available, the 2010 version was selected for this
analysis in order to be consistent with the CLT analysis, which used the latest available version of eGrid
(version 2010) from SimaPro.
The Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) region of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) region map was selected. See Figure 10 for a map of the NERC regions.
Figure 10. NERC regions used in eGrid (US EPA 2010).
NOVEMBER 2019 32
The CO2e emission rate for the WECC region in eGRID2010 in SimaPro was slightly different than the
value provided on the US EPA website. This was likely because SimaPro included additional factors such
as transportation and additional greenhouse gases. Since the SimaPro value was higher and thus slightly
more conservative, this analysis used the SimaPro value, which was 0.552 kg CO2e/kWh.
The building EUI was combined with this emission rate to obtain the GWP impact per year for this
building:
𝑘𝐵𝑇𝑈 3.282 𝑠𝑓 1 𝑘𝑊ℎ 0.552 𝑘𝑔 𝐶𝑂2𝑒

= (22.4 )( 2
)( )( )
𝑠𝑓 ∙ 𝑦𝑟 𝑚 3.412 𝑘𝐵𝑇𝑈 𝑘𝑊ℎ
= 39.0 kg CO2e/m2/year
The total GWP impact over a 60 year building lifespan was calculated as:
= (39.0 kg CO2e/m2/year) x (60 years)
= 2,339 kg CO2e/m2
NOVEMBER 2019 33
Results
The results of the CLT LCA and the Catalyst Building LCA are presented in this section.
CLT
The results of the CLT LCA are presented separately for the baseline model and the conservative model.
Baseline model
Table 13 shows the impacts of each process involved in the CLT production: lumber production, lumber
transportation, CLT manufacturing, and CLT transportation to the construction site. The total global
warming was 129.62 kg CO2e for the CLT, with onsite CLT manufacturing being the largest contributor,
producing 59.43 kg CO2e to the total. Figure 11 describes the percent contribution of each process.
Table 13. LCA Impacts and primary energy consumption of each process included in the CLT LCA under baseline
model (unit: 1 m3 of CLT).
Lumber Lumber Onsite CLT

Measurement Unit Total Production Transport Manufacturing
Global Warming kg CO2e 129.62 51.40 18.79 59.43
Acidification kg SO2e 1.22 0.53 0.24 0.45
Eutrophication kg Ne 0.1 0.03 0.01 0.05
Smog kg O3e 20.31 10.52 6.18 3.61
Ozone Depletion kg CFC-11e 4.08E-06 1.63E-06 7.94E-10 2.45E-06
Non-renewable, MJ 2,359.05 828.84 286.13 1,244.08
Fossil
Non-renewable, MJ 242.8 79.31 - 163.49
Nuclear
Non-renewable, MJ 0.0019 - - 0.0019
Biomass
Renewable, MJ 1,563.61 1,562.01 - 1.60
Biomass
Renewable, Wind, MJ 74.75 73.91 - 0.84
Solar, Geothermal
Renewable, Water MJ 4.12 - - 4.12
NOVEMBER 2019 34
Lumber Production CLT Manufacturing Lumber Transportation
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Global warming Acidification Eutrophication Smog Ozone depletion
Figure 11. Contribution of each supply chain process, baseline model.
Conservative model
In comparison to the baseline model, the CLT manufacturing contributed higher impacts to the overall
impacts of the supply chain. Out of a total of 157.52 kg CO2e in global warming contribution, onsite CLT
manufacturing contributed 87.32 kg CO2e By accounting for all possible future equipment and
assuming all additional equipment operate 100% of the time, onsite CLT manufacturing contributed 32%
higher impacts compared to the baseline model. The conservative model showed a 22% increase in
total impacts compared to the baseline model. Table 14 describes the percent contribution of each
process. Figure 12 demonstrates the percent contribution of each process in the supply chain.
NOVEMBER 2019 35
Table 14. LCA Impacts and primary energy consumption of each process included in the CLT LCA under
conservative model (unit: 1 m3 of CLT).
Unit Total Lumber Lumber Onsite CLT

Production Transport Manufacturing
Global Warming kg CO2e 157.52 51.40 18.79 87.32
Acidification kg SO2e 1.45 0.53 0.24 0.67
Eutrophication kg Ne 0.1 0.03 0.01 0.06
Smog kg O3e 21.64 10.52 6.18 4.94
Ozone Depletion kg CFC- 4.08E-06 1.63E-06 7.94E-10 2.45E-06
11e
Non-renewable, MJ 2,786.72 828.84 286.13 1671.75
Fossil
Non-renewable, MJ 242.8 79.31 - 163.49
Nuclear
Non-renewable, MJ 0.0019 - - 0.0019
Biomass
Renewable, MJ 1,563.61 1,562.01 - 1.60
Biomass
Renewable, Wind, MJ 74.75 73.91 - 0.84
Solar, Geothermal
Renewable, Water MJ 4.12 - - 4.12
Lumber Production CLT Manufacturing Lumber Transportation
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Global warming Acidification Eutrophication Smog Ozone depletion
Figure 12. Contribution of each supply chain process, conservative model.
A study conducted by CORRIM (Puettmann et al. 2017) showed a global warming impact of 82.91 kg
CO2e for onsite CLT manufacturing, which is higher than the results shown in the baseline model, but
NOVEMBER 2019 36
slightly lower than that of the conservative model. The lumber transportation in the CORRIM study had
a total of 96.85 kg CO2e if lumber transportation is added to the onsite CLT manufacturing, higher than
the results under the baseline model. Further, if lumber production was included, the overall global
warming impact in the CORRIM study was 158.67 kg CO2e, similar to the result under the conservative
model shown here. Another study by Chen et al. demonstrated a global warming impact of 96.71 kg
CO2e for onsite CLT manufacturing, which was higher than both of the models described in this report
(Chen et al. 2019). However, that study considered different lumber transportation scenarios: if the
lumber was produced locally, the total global warming impact of onsite CLT manufacturing and lumber
transportation was 98.1 kg CO2e, which is lower than the global warming impact reported under the
conservative model. It is also important to note the wood species used for lumber production, which
would directly influence the impacts of transportation. Chen et al. considered a baseline scenario using
a 50-50 mix of Douglas-fir and Western Hemlock for lumber, while CORRIM used Douglas-fir only. On
the other hand, Katerra uses SPF lumber, which has a lower SG than Douglas-fir and Western Hemlock.
Contribution analysis
A contribution analysis was performed to investigate the impact of each sub-process within a supply
chain stage. Lumber production is divided into three sub-processes, including forestry operation, log
transportation to lumber mills, and lumber manufacturing. Onsite CLT manufacturing is divided into six
sub-processes, including lumber infeed, finger joint, board sorting, layup, and adhesive application,
press, and panel finishing. Contribution of the onsite CLT manufacturing varied between the baseline
and conservative models, whereas the contribution of all other processes remained unchanged since the
different models only apply to CLT manufacturing (Figure 13). Figure 14 shows the global warming
contribution of each sub-process in the onsite CLT manufacturing stage for both the baseline model and
conservative model. The main global warming contribution came from the lumber infeed, which
included drying of the lumber in preparation for finger joint. When considering the conservative model,
the contribution of the panel finishing sub-process significantly increased compared to that of the
baseline model. This could be due to the extra processing equipment that is expected to be added in
the future, as well as extra dust collection system that may be required in the future.
NOVEMBER 2019 37
Figure 13. Contribution of each process in the two CLT LCA models.
NOVEMBER 2019 38
Figure 14. Side-by-side comparison of onsite CLT manufacturing between the baseline and conservative models.
NOVEMBER 2019 39
Catalyst Building
This subsection presents the LCA results Table 15. Material grouping for graph color-coding.
for the Catalyst Building, starting with an Material group Material (original name)
overview of all impact categories before Aluminum Aluminum
Concrete Concrete (3000 psi)
diving into a more detailed analysis of
Concrete (4000 psi)
GWP. This subsection focuses mostly on Concrete (5000 psi)
the life cycle stage A results because it Gypcrete
Crushed rock Crushed rock
had the most comprehensive
Extruded polystyrene Extruded polystyrene
information in terms of material Glass mat gypsum panel Glass mat gypsum panel
quantities and LCA data. In order to Glazing Glazing
flesh out stage B or stage C impacts, Grout Grout

Intumescent paint Intumescent paint
more information about maintenance,
Mineral wool board Mineral wool board
material replacement rates, disposal Polyiso foam insulation Polyiso foam insulation
plans, etc. would have been needed. Polyurethane Polyurethane
Steel Galvanized steel
For ease of interpretation, similar Prefinished steel panel
materials were grouped together for PT steel

Rebar
color-coding of materials. The material
Steel
grouping scheme is shown in Table 15. Steel insulated panel Steel and insulation
Terra cotta Terra cotta
Textiles and membranes Geotextile
Modified bitumen membrane
Polypropylene & adhesive
SBS membrane
TPO membrane
Wood CLT (SPF)
GLT (SPF)
Glulam (AYC)
Glulam (SPF)
Modified wood finish
NOVEMBER 2019 40
All impact categories, life cycle stage A
Figure 15 presents an overview of all the impact categories and their distribution by material groups.
Figure 16 presents a breakdown of all impact categories by building category, subcategory, and item.
These figures present an overview of how the distribution of impacts by material groups and items vary
by impact category. For example, it is interesting to note that the proportion of overall impact
attributed to wood is smaller in GWP than in primary energy, or that concrete has a relatively large
impact in GWP and EP but has a less significant impact in the other categories. Note that ODP tends to
have a very high level of uncertainty, which could explain why its distribution pattern differs from the
other impact categories.
Figure 15. Overview of all impact category results, life cycle stage A only, color-coded by material group.
NOVEMBER 2019 41
Figure 16. All impact categories by building category, subcategory, and item, life cycle stage A.
NOVEMBER 2019 42
GWP detailed results, life cycle stage A
Figure 17 presents the relative contributions of the materials to the overall GWP, separated by category
and subcategory. This figure shows that:
 The GWP of structure is greater than that of enclosure

o In the structural system, the gravity system has the greatest proportion of impacts,
followed by subgrade, foundation, then lateral system
o In the enclosure, the wall system has the greatest proportion of impacts, followed by
roof then subgrade.
 In terms of materials, wood, concrete, aluminum and glazing have the greatest GWP. This is
explored in later figures.
Figure 17. GWP results (life cycle stage A), separated by category, subcategory, and color-coded by material
group.
NOVEMBER 2019 43
Figure 18 separates the results by item.
Figure 18. GWP results (life cycle stage A), separated by category, subcategory, item, and color-coded by the
material groups.
NOVEMBER 2019 44
Figure 19 ranks the overall impacts individual materials on the project by descending GWP impact, color-
coded by the material groups. As seen in previous figures, CLT has the greatest overall impact, followed
by aluminum, gypcrete, and concrete.
Figure 19. GWP results (life cycle stage A), ranked by the overall impact of materials, color-coded by the material
groups.
NOVEMBER 2019 45
Figure 20 ranks the overall impact of the material groups by descending GWP impact. As seen earlier,
wood and concrete are the most significant, and have a similar overall GWP impacts. Steel, glazing,
aluminum, and steel insulated panels are also significant.
Figure 20. GWP results (life cycle stage A), ranked by the overall impact of material groups.
Figure 21 presents an alternative method of viewing the material contributions to overall GWP using a
treemap. The size of the rectangles represent the magnitude of the GWP contribution, and the color-
coding indicates material group. Not all rectangles could be labeled due to space constraints.
NOVEMBER 2019 46
Figure 21. Treemap of GWP results (life cycle stage A) labeled by item and color-coded by the material groups.
Figure 22 presents GWP vs mass of the items in the building, color-coded by the material groups. The
items in the lower-left corner are not labeled due to space constraints. However, the important items
are the ones farther along the axes. This graph provides a sense of which items have high overall GWP
NOVEMBER 2019 47
on the project, which items have high overall mass, and which items are both, i.e. carbon intensity vs
mass intensity.
Figure 22. GWP (life cycle stage A) vs mass of items in building.
Items that have relatively high GWP but relatively low mass on the project are:
 Exterior glazing (glass)

 Insulated metal panel (steel and insulation)
 Carrier rails (aluminum)
NOVEMBER 2019 48
 Insulation build-up in the roof (polyiso)
Items that have relatively low GWP but relatively high mass are:
 Slab-on-grade underlayment (aggregate, or crushed rock)
Items that have both high GWP and high mass in the building are:
 CLT slabs and glulam beams and columns

 Concrete items (especially the gypcrete topping slab and concrete mat foundation)
Carbon storage
This study treated biogenic carbon in accordance with the North America Product Category Rule
(FPInnovations 2015) and the default TRACI impact method was used. Under the carbon neutrality
assumption of wood products, TRACI does not account for CO2 emitted through woody biomass
consumption toward the final global warming impact but accounts for all other emissions other than
CO2.
The quantity of carbon stored in the building was calculated as follows. Since “carbon storage” could
refer to the quantity of stored elemental carbon or stored carbon dioxide, both the elemental carbon
and carbon dioxide versions are provided here.
Assumptions:
 From building data, the total volume of wood on project (CLT + glulam + cladding): 4,165
m3
 Density of SPF: 420 kg/m3 (SPF density was used because 99% of the wood volume on
the project was SPF)
 % carbon of wood by weight: 50% (approx assumption)
Calculations:
Total weight of wood = (4,165 m3) * (420 kg/m3) = 1,749,451 kg
Total weight of stored elemental carbon:
= (1,749,451 kg wood) * (50% kg C / kg wood)
NOVEMBER 2019 49
= 874,725 kg C = 874.7 metric tonnes C
= 55.8 kg C/m2
Total weight of stored carbon dioxide:
= (1,749,451 kg wood) * (50% kg C / kg wood) * (44 kg CO2 / 12 kg C)
= 3,207,326 kg CO2 = 3207 metric tonnes CO2
= 204.4 kg CO2/m2
Given that the overall GWP of the building was calculated to be 207 kg CO2e/m2, this carbon storage
result nearly offsets the embodied carbon impact of construction. Therefore, one could say that the
biogenic carbon storage practically offsets the impacts of construction, at least in the near-term before
the wood decomposes in a landfill at end-of-life. However, in order to rigorously incorporate the
benefit of carbon storage into LCA results, a dynamic approach should be used, which takes into account
the time when emission and sequestration occur.
Operational energy
Figure 23 presents a projection of operational energy alongside the embodied impact of construction as
well as approximate stored CO2. The assumed lifetime of the building was 60 years, which is typical in
building LCAs. Two energy grid scenarios are shown:
(a) Default: Assumes that the emissions from the electrical grid stay constant
(b) Grid to zero by 2045: Assumes that emissions from the electrical grid steadily decline to zero by
2045 (i.e. a clean energy grid). This scenario is based on legislation passed in Washington State
in April 2019 requiring 100% clean energy by 2045 (U.S. News 2019).
The projected cumulative GWP impacts of the two scenarios are shown in Figure 23. The vertical gray
lines at the year 2030 and 2050 are labeled with the percentage of operational carbon (OC) and
embodied carbon (EC) at that point in time.
NOVEMBER 2019 50
Figure 23. Operational energy projection for (a) default scenario with constant electricity grid output, (b)
scenario where the electrical grid declines to zero by year 2045. OC = operational carbon, EC = embodied
carbon.
NOVEMBER 2019 51
Discussion
This section presents a discussion of the results.
Hot spots and opportunities for improvement
This subsection discusses hot spots and opportunities for improvement separately for 1) the CLT
production, and 2) the Catalyst Building.
CLT
The production capacity of Katerra is expected to increase in the near future. As the largest CLT
manufacturing facility in the U.S., Katerra can produce 187,000 m3 of CLT at just 85% of its full
production capacity. This larger capacity could make the Katerra facility more efficient compared to CLT
facilities of smaller capacities, leading to lower environmental impacts. Further, the lumber used at the
Katerra CLT facility is SPF, which is a lighter material compared to lumber produced using other common
wood species combination in the Pacific Northwest, for instance, Douglas-fir or Western Hemlock. The
lighter wood species helped reduce the impacts associated with transportation.
There are several recommendations that may help further increase the production efficiency while
reducing environmental impacts:
1. Obtaining lumber from local sources can reduce the environmental impacts significantly. The
average distance between Katerra’s CLT facility and the sawmills is approximately 328 km in the
current model. If Katerra can source the lumber within a 100-km radius, the total impact of
lumber transportation alone may be reduced by as much as 70%. Further, improving the
sourcing of lumber is more feasible than changing the input of the production process.
2. Currently, the lumber purchased by Katerra is round-edged. Round-edged lumber requires
additional cutting to square the edges before CLT can be produced, leading to additional waste.
If possible, Katerra could purchase square-edged lumber to help reduce waste and energy
consumption resulting from lumber preparation.
3. Currently, to reduce the moisture content from 19% to 12%, the lumber is dried at Katerra’s CLT
facility using a natural gas kiln (this drying step occurs under “Onsite CLT Manufacturing” >
“Lumber Infeed”). An alternative method for reducing the environmental impact of drying
NOVEMBER 2019 52
would be to dry the lumber at the sawmill using hog fuel, which is a waste product of lumber
production.
Catalyst Building
This section identifies the highest-impact components and materials of the building and offers strategies
for impact reduction.
In the structure of the building, the highest-impact items are ranked as follows (in descending GWP):
1. Slabs: Slabs are typically the most massive part of a structural system, so this ranking is
expected. The GWP impact contribution of the structural slabs is approximately 70% CLT, 25%
GLT, and 7% steel connections. For impact reduction opportunities for CLT, see the earlier hot-
spot analysis for the CLT LCA. With regards to material reduction, the research team assumes
that the design team designed the slabs for optimal structural and material efficiency, but offers
the following options as general strategies that can help optimize structural mass and thus
minimize the environmental impacts of the structural slabs:
a. Add intermediate beams in the structural bays
b. Avoid charring design as a method of fireproofing (use alternative methods of
fireproofing)
c. Reduce column spacing
2. Beams and columns: The glulam beams and columns have the next-highest impact. Most of
the impacts are likely due to the beams. The mass of the beams may be reduced by exploring
the same strategies listed under ‘1. Slabs.’
3. Acoustic underlayment, topping slab, and mat foundation all have approximately the same
GWP impact. The design of these building components probably cannot be optimized further.
However, lower-impact concrete and gypcrete may be achieved by focusing on cement. The
impact of cement can be lowered by 1) reducing the amount of cement in the mix, 2)
substituting with lower-impact cement alternatives, such as fly ash or blast furnace slag cement,
or 3) using concrete that contains carbon dioxide injections (see www.carboncure.com).
Carbon-storing aggregate is also an option (see www.blueplanet-ltd.com).
NOVEMBER 2019 53
The next three highest-impact items can be found in the enclosure. Without seeing the actual building
plans and understanding the design considerations, the research team can only generally recommend
minimizing the use of these enclosure items. These items are (in descending GWP):
4. Exterior glazing: Glass for glazing is energy-intensive to produce, and thus tends to be relatively
high in embodied carbon.
5. Insulated metal panel: Insulated metal panels are high in embodied carbon because they have
metal, usually steel, which is traditionally high in embodied carbon, especially if it is produced
from a blast oxygen furnace (BOF) instead of an electric arc furnace (EAF). In the case of the
Kingspan product used on this project, “in the sourcing and extraction stage, the largest
contributors to the impacts in terms of raw materials are steel (46%) and foam (30.5%)”
(Kingspan 2019), so the foam is also relatively high in environmental impacts.
6. Aluminum carrier rails: Aluminum is also environmentally-intensive to produce. In some cases,
its GWP impact can be six times higher than that of steel, kg per kg.
Comparison to other buildings
This section presents a simple comparison of the Catalyst Building GWP results with other relevant
studies. It is important to note that the intent of this section is not to make comparative assertions of
environmental performance, since there are limitations in this study and the other studies that preclude
their comparability. Instead, this section merely demonstrates that the embodied carbon of the Catalyst
Building are on the same order of magnitude as other similar buildings.
Figure 24 compares the Catalyst Building results with a number of other wood case study LCAs:
 Brock Commons Tallwood House at University of British Columbia, Canada (Bowick, n.d.)
 Carbon 12 in Portland, Oregon (Kaiser 2019), (ThinkWood 2019)
 T3 Minneapolis in Minnesota (Johnson 2018). The two X’s shown are for 1) a cradle-to-gate
assessment (approximately 130 kg CO2e/m2) and 2) a cradle-to-grave assessment
(approximately 195 kg CO2e/m2).
 An 8-story apartment building in Sweden (Gustavsson et al. 2010)
 A 5-story office building in Canada (Robertson et al. 2012)
 Three versions of a reference building based on three LCA tools in Sweden (Sinha et al. 2016)
NOVEMBER 2019 54
 Best-case and worst-case scenario from a study based on a hotel structure in Norway (Skullestad
et al. 2016)
 Three 4-story residential buildings in Australia (Lu et al. 2017)
 Two hypothetical 8-story office buildings in the Pacific Northwest (Pierobon et al. 2019)
 Multiple buildings from the Embodied Carbon Benchmark study, limited to North American
buildings, mid-rise office type (7-14 stories, since there was only one low-rise office building
with these other criteria), structure only (Simonen et al. 2017). Note that none of these
buildings had a wood structural system.
NOVEMBER 2019 55
Figure 24. Comparison of the Catalyst Building with other studies.
Figure 25 presents a subset of the buildings presented in the previous figure, limited to the studies that
had the most similar LCA assumptions to this study (wood structure, life cycle stage A, excluding
biogenic carbon credit). This figure shows that the Catalyst Building results are on the same order of
magnitude as other similar studies.
NOVEMBER 2019 56
Figure 25. Comparison of the Catalyst building with other wood case studies, limited to studies with similar LCA
assumptions.
NOVEMBER 2019 57
Conclusion
A life cycle assessment was performed on Katerra’s new CLT supply chain and manufacturing process as
well as one of Katerra’s buildings under construction, the Catalyst Building, in Spokane, Washington.
Based on the results of the LCA, the research team found the following opportunities for environmental
impact reduction:
 For the CLT manufacturing:

o Obtain lumber from more local sources.
o Purchase square-edged lumber instead of rounded-edge lumber, if possible.
o Consider alternative drying methods for lumber drying, such as drying at sawmill with
hogfuel instead of onsite at the CLT manufacturing facility with a natural gas kiln.
 For the Catalyst Building:
o Reduce the amount of materials in the floor system (slabs and beams) by reducing the
impacts of CLT (above) and/or exploring the alternative geometric configuration of the
bays.
o Lower the impact of gypcrete and concrete by 1) reducing the amount of cement in the
mix, 2) substituting Portland cement with alternative cementitious materials, and 3)
consider carbon dioxide injection or carbon-storing aggregate.
o Reduce the quantity of high-impact construction materials generally, which include:
concrete, glazing, and metal items in the cladding such as insulated metal panels and
aluminum carrier rails.
After conducting this short study, the research team sees many opportunities to refine the LCAs of the
CLT model and the Catalyst Building. Proposed future work are as follows:
 Collect more data from the factory after a year of operations. The factory had just begun
production when this study was performed, so collecting additional information after factory
operations have been established would help refine the model.
 Perform more sophisticated biogenic carbon calculations. The carbon storage calculations
presented in this report are simple, but a more sophisticated analysis including more aspects of
the supply chain could be done.
NOVEMBER 2019 58
 Incorporate Avista electricity data into energy calculations. One reviewer inquired about using
actual mix data from the local electricity provider (Avista). The research team did not have time
to request data from Avista within the time frame of the project deadline, but would be
interested in developing the results based on the specialized grid. It should be noted that using
generic LCI electricity grid data, such as eGRID, is common practice and widely-accepted for
LCAs.
 Limit building LCA to A1-A3 only. This study considered all of life cycle stage A, but limiting the
life cycle scope to A1-A3 would increase the internal comparability of the LCA data.
 Refine concrete material quantities with concrete mix designs. As mentioned in
“Methodology” > “Catalyst Building” > “Material quantities and LCA data” > “Concrete,” two mix
designs were not used in this analysis. The material quantities were not provided according to
the mix designs, so some assumptions had to be made. The research team would be interested
in refining the concrete LCA results by working with Katerra to revise the concrete material
quantities specific to each mix design.
NOVEMBER 2019 59
References
2015 International Energy Conservation Code. 2016. “CHAPTER 3 [CE] GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.”
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IECC2015/chapter-3-ce-general-requirements?site_type=public.
Accsys Technologies PLC. 2015. “Environmental Product Declaration - Accoya Wood - Decking, Cladding
and Planed Timber for Joinery Applications.” http://www.accoya.com/resource-.
Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association. 2016. “Environmental Product Declaration - SBS-Modified

Bitumen Roofing Membrane - Installation: Cold Adhesive.” www.certainteed.com.
Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. 2018. “A Cradle-to-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Canadian
Surfaced Dry Softwood Lumber.” http://www.athenasmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CtoG-
LCA-of-Canadian-Surfaced-Dry-Softwood-Lumber.pdf.
Bowick, Matt. n.d. “Brock Commons Tallwood House, University of British Columbia, An Environmental
Building Declaration According to EN 15978 Standard.” http://www.athenasmi.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/08/Tallwood_House_Environmental_Declaration_20180608.pdf.
Carbon Leadership Forum. 2018. “Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings: A Practice Guide.”
doi:http://hdl.handle.net/1773/41885.
Carlisle Syntec Systems. 2018. “FAST Dual Cartridge Adhesive Product Data Sheet.”
https://www.carlislesyntec.com/view.aspx?mode=media&assetID=12539.
Chen, Cindy X., Francesca Pierobon, and Indroneil Ganguly. 2019. “Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Cross-
Laminated Timber (CLT) Produced in Western Washington: The Role of Logistics and Wood Species
Mix.” Sustainability (Switzerland) 11 (5). doi:10.3390/su11051278.
ecoinvent. 2019. “Ecoinvent Version 3.5.” https://www.ecoinvent.org/database/database.html.
EPA. 2016. “EGRID2016 Summary Tables.” https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-

02/documents/egrid2016_summarytables.pdf.
Ferrometall AS. 2015. “Environmental Product Declaration - Prestressed Steel for Reinforcemenet of
Concrete, PC Strand.” https://www.epd-norge.no/getfile.php/135913-
1469026878/EPDer/Byggevarer/Stålkonstruksjoner/NEPD-326-206-EN_Prestressed-steel-for-
reinforcemenet-of-concrete--PC-Strand.pdf.
NOVEMBER 2019 60
FPInnovations. 2015. “Product Category Rules (PCR) for North America Structural and Architectural
Wood Products.” https://fpinnovations.ca.
Gustavsson, L, A Joelsson, and R Sathre. 2010. “Life Cycle Primary Energy Use and Carbon Emission of an
Eight-Storey Wood-Framed Apartment Building.” Energy and Buildings 42 (2): 230–42.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778809002126.
Hischier R., Weidema B., Althaus H.-J., Bauer C., Doka G., Dones R., Frischknecht R., Hellweg S., Humbert
S., Jungbluth N., Köllner T., Loerincik Y., Margni M., Nemecek T. 2010. “Implementation of Life
Cycle Impact Assessment Methods. Ecoinvent Report No. 3, v2.2.”
https://www.ecoinvent.org/files/201007_hischier_weidema_implementation_of_lcia_methods.pd
f.
Hjulsbro Steel AB. 2016. “Environmental Product Declaration - PC-Strand, Prestressed Steel for
Reinforcement of Concrete.” https://gryphon4.environdec.com/system/data/files/6/11407/S-P-
00810 EPD PC Strand.pdf.
J.F. Amonn Srl - Color Division Srl/GmbH. 2019. “Environmental Product Declaration in Accordance with
ISO 14025 and EN 15804, INTUMESCENT COATING, J.F. Amonn Srl - DivisioneColor Srl/GmbH.”
https://gryphon4.environdec.com/system/data/files/6/15280/S-P-01434 Intumescent coating.pdf.
Johnson, Leif. 2018. “The T3 Sequel: Applying Lessons Learned, Advancing Mass Timber and Improving
Life Cycle Assessments (LCA).” https://www.woodworks.org/wp-
content/uploads/presentation_slides-JOHNSON-The-T3-Sequel-Applying-Lessons-Learned-WSF-
180425.pdf.
Kaiser, Ben. 2019. “Structurlam Case Study: Carbon 12, Portland, Oregon.” Accessed October 29.
https://www.structurlam.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Carbon-12-Case-Study-2.pdf.
Kingspan. 2019. “Environmental Product Declaration - Kingspan - QuadCore Insulated Metal Panel.”
https://www.kingspan.com/us/en-us/product-groups/insulated-panel-
systems/downloads/certifications/environmental-product-declaration-quadcore.
Laboratory, National Renewable Energy. 2012. “U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database (USLCI).”
https://www.lcacommons.gov/nrel/search.
LTS. 2019. “DATASMART LCI Package.” https://ltsexperts.com/services/software/datasmart-life-cycle-
NOVEMBER 2019 61
inventory/.
Lu, Hangyong Ray, Ali El Hanandeh, and Benoit P. Gilbert. 2017. “A Comparative Life Cycle Study of
Alternative Materials for Australian Multi-Storey Apartment Building Frame Constructions:
Environmental and Economic Perspective.” Journal of Cleaner Production 166 (November): 458–73.
doi:10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2017.08.065.
Pierobon, Francesca, Monica Huang, Kathrina Simonen, and Indroneil Ganguly. 2019. “Environmental
Benefits of Using Hybrid CLT Structure in Midrise Non-Residential Construction: An LCA Based
Comparative Case Study in the U.S. Pacific Northwest.” Journal of Building Engineering 26
(November): 100862. doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100862.
PRé. 2019. “SimaPro Database Manual Methods Library.” https://simapro.com/wp-

content/uploads/2019/02/DatabaseManualMethods.pdf.
Puettmann, Maureen, Arjit Sinha, and Indroneil Ganguly. 2017. “Life Cycle Assessment of Cross
Laminated Timbers Produced in Oregon.” https://corrim.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Life-
Cycle-Assessment-of-Oregon-Cross-Laminated-Timber.pdf.
Robertson, Adam B., Frank C. F. Lam, and Raymond J. Cole. 2012. “A Comparative Cradle-to-Gate Life
Cycle Assessment of Mid-Rise Office Building Construction Alternatives: Laminated Timber or
Reinforced Concrete.” Buildings 2 (4): 245–70. doi:10.3390/buildings2030245.
Rockwool North America. 2019. “ROCKWOOLTM Stone Wool Insulation.” https://epd-online.com.
Rudolf Hensel GmbH. 2014. “Environmental Product Declaration: HENSOTHERM®.” https://www.rudolf-

hensel.de/wp-content/uploads/post/EPD_410KS_420KS_421KS_GB.pdf.
Simonen, Kathrina, Barbara X. Rodriguez, Erin McDade, and Larry Strain. 2017. “Embodied Carbon
Benchmark Study: LCA for Low Carbon Construction.” http://hdl.handle.net/1773/38017.
Sinha, Rajib, Maria Lennartsson, and Björn Frostell. 2016. “Environmental Footprint Assessment of
Building Structures: A Comparative Study.” Building and Environment 104 (August): 162–71.
doi:10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2016.05.012.
Skullestad, Julie Lyslo, Rolf André Bohne, and Jardar Lohne. 2016. “High-Rise Timber Buildings as a
Climate Change Mitigation Measure – A Comparative LCA of Structural System Alternatives.”
NOVEMBER 2019 62
Energy Procedia 96 (September): 112–23. doi:10.1016/J.EGYPRO.2016.09.112.
ThinkWood. 2019. “Carbon12.” Accessed October 29. https://www.thinkwood.com/our-

projects/carbon12.
Trueman, Eleanor. 2012. “Accoya® Wood 2012 Cradle-to-Gate Carbon Footprint Update.”
https://www.accoya.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Accoya-wood-2012-cradle-to-gate-
carbon-footprint-update.pdf.
U.S. News. 2019. “Washington Poised to Require 100 Percent Clean Energy by 2045.”
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2019-04-24/washington-poised-to-require-
100-percent-clean-energy-by-2045.
US EPA. 2010. “EGRID 9th Edition Version 1.0 NERC Region File (Year 2010 Data).”
https://www.epa.gov/energy/emissions-generation-resource-integrated-database-egrid.
worldsteel. 2018. “World Steel Association Life Cycle Inventory, Industry Data 2.0.” www.worldsteel.org.
NOVEMBER 2019 63
Life Cycle Assessment
of
Katerra’s
Cross-Laminated Timber
and
Catalyst Building
Summary Document
February 2020
By
The Carbon Leadership Forum

www.carbonleadershipforum.org
and
The Center for International Trade in Forest Products

www.cintrafor.org
SUMMARY DOCUMENT UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Katerra has developed its own cross-laminated timber (CLT)
manufacturing facility in Spokane Valley, Washington. This
25,100 m2 (270,000 ft2) factory is the largest CLT manufac-
turing facility in the world, and is capable of producing
approximately 187,000 m3 of CLT per year. Katerra has also
established a vertically integrated supply chain to provide
the wood for the CLT factory. Production started in 2019. A
picture of the factory is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Katerra CLT manufacturing facility in Spokane
Katerra commissioned the Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF) Valley, Washington (credit: Katerra).
and Center for International Trade in Forest Products (CIN-

TRAFOR) at the University of Washington to analyze the environmental impacts of its CLT as well as the Catalyst Build-
ing in Spokane, Washington. The Catalyst is a 15,690 m2 (168,800 ft2), five-story office building that makes extensive
use of CLT as a structural and design element. Jointly developed by Avista and McKinstry, Katerra largely designed
and constructed the building, and used CLT produced by Katerra’s new factory. Performing a life cycle assessment
(LCA) on Katerra’s CLT will allow Katerra to explore opportunities for environmental impact reduction along their
supply chain and improve their CLT production efficiency. Performing an LCA on the Catalyst Building will enable
Katerra to better understand life cycle environmental impacts of mass timber buildings and identify opportunities to
optimize the environmental performance of mid-rise CLT structures.
CLT LCA
The research team determined that the embodied carbon impact of The cradle-to-gate embodied
Katerra’s CLT is 130 - 158 kg CO2e/m (varying depending on mod-
3
carbon of Katerra’s CLT is
eling assumptions). This result falls at the lower end of the spectrum
of the results from other LCA studies of CLT produced in the United
130 - 158 kg CO2e/m3,
States [1]-[3]. This lower impact is likely due to a combination of the which falls on the low-end of the
use of lighter-weight wood species, higher efficiencies of production range for U.S. CLT products
processes, higher efficiencies in adhesive use, and a higher waste
recovery rate. Based on an analysis of the results, the research team determined that Katerra could further reduce
the environmental impacts of its CLT by: 1) reducing long distance transportation impacts by locally sourcing the
wood, 2) streamlining the CLT lamstock procurement process to reduce waste, and 3) drying lumber at the sawmill
with hogfuel instead of at the manufacturing facility with a natural gas kiln. Additional research work could refine
the results by gathering more factory data after a year of operations and explore the effects of varying multiple
study parameters.
Catalyst Building LCA

The upfront embodied carbon of the The life cycle assessment of the Catalyst Building, core and shell
Catalyst Building is approximately only, estimated the upfront embodied carbon of the building to be
207 kg CO2e/m2, 207 kg CO2e/m2. This result is similar to other mass timber buildings
and is lower than most other office buildings per unit of floor area,
which is similar to other mass timber
according to the Embodied Carbon Benchmark Study [4]. Ad-
buildings and lower than most other
ditionally, the Catalyst Building stores approximately 204 kg CO2/
office buildings per unit floor area. m2 of biogenic carbon, which nearly offsets its upfront embod-
This number does not include the carbon ied carbon. However, a more comprehensive analysis, including
stored in the wood nor the impacts of end-of-life considerations, should be performed in order to draw
maintenance and end-of-life. more definitive conclusions about the total carbon footprint of the
building.
2
INTRODUCTION ide equivalent [kg SO2e]

• Eutrophication potential (EP) in kilograms of nitrogen
Katerra is a start-up construction company that has de- equivalent [kg Ne]
veloped a vertically integrated cross-laminated timber • Ozone depletion potential (ODP) in kilograms of
(CLT) manufacturing supply chain and facility. Katerra trichlorofluoromethane (CFC11) equivalent [kg
commissioned the Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF) and CFC11e]
the Center for International Trade in Forest Products • Smog formation potential (SFP) in kilograms of ozone
(CINTRAFOR) at the University of Washington to perform equivalent [kg O3e]
a life cycle assessment (LCA) study to understand the • Primary energy consumption [MJ]
environmental impacts and opportunities for impact
reduction in Katerra’s CLT supply chain and manufac- The in-depth analysis of the results focuses on GWP,
turing process. CINTRAFOR performed an LCA of the since this is a primary impact measure of concern in the
CLT supply chain and production process while the CLF building industry.
performed a whole building LCA of a new building that
used CLT produced at Katerra’s CLT facility. System boundary
The system boundary of the CLT LCA is shown in Figure
GOAL 2 (next page). The system boundary of the building
LCA was limited to core and shell (structure and enclo-
The goal of this study was to understand the environ-
sure only). Interior fit-out and tenant improvements, i.e.
mental impacts of Katerra’s CLT and highlight opportu-
interior finishes, partitions, mechanical, electrical, and
nities for impact reduction. To do so, the research team
plumbing, were not included. The specific components
performed the following activities:
included in the building LCA are later shown in Figure 4
• The CINTRAFOR team performed an LCA of Katerra’s
in the Results and Discussion section.
CLT, taking into account the source of lumber (British
Columbia, Canada), the species mix (Spruce-Pine-
Fir), the location of the manufacturing facility (Spo- Life cycle scope
kane Valley, Washington), and the manufacturing Generally, the CLT LCA covered the following life cycle
process of producing the CLT. stages:
• The CLF research team performed a whole building • A1: Forestry operations and lumber production
LCA (WBLCA) of a 5-story, commercial mixed-use • A2: Transportation from sawmills to CLT manufactur-
building that was largely designed and construct- ing facility
ed by Katerra. This building is named the Catalyst • A3: Onsite CLT manufacturing
Building and is located in Spokane, Washington. The
building was under construction at the time of this The building LCA covered the following life cycle
writing. stages:
• A: Product and construction process stages
METHODOLOGY ○ A1: Raw material extraction
○ A2: Transportation of materials from material sup-
Environmental impacts assessed ply to the manufacturing facility
Five environmental impact measures were evaluated ○ A3: Product and material processing/manufac-
and characterized using the Tool for the Reduction turing
and Assessment of Chemical and other Environmental ○ A4: Transportation of materials from manufactur-
Impacts (TRACI) 2.1. Primary energy consumption was ing facility to the building site
also assessed using the Cumulative Energy Demand ○ A5: Construction and installation
(CED). These impact measures were [with units of mea- • B: Use stage
surement in brackets]: ○ B6: Operational energy use only
• Global warming potential (GWP) in kilograms of car- • D: Benefits and loads beyond the system boundary
bon dioxide equivalent [kg CO2e] ○ Biogenic carbon storage
• Acidification potential (AP) in kilograms of sulfur diox-
3
Input: Diesel Fuel, Electricity, Water,

Resin, etc.
System Boundary
Yard
Seedling Sawing
CLT Mill
Forest Manage-
ment Drying Layup and Adhesive Ap-
A2
Logging
Pressing
Planning
Finishing
Dried Lumber
A1 A3
Color legend
Output: Emissions to air, water and land: resi- All generic data
due, water, ash, GHGs, etc.
Reflects actual transporta�on distances
Reflects factory data

Figure 2. System boundary for CLT production.
Method ucts, TRACI does not account for CO2 emitted through
woody biomass consumption toward the final global
The LCA of the CLT supply chain and manufacturing
warming impact but accounts for all other emissions
process was performed using SimaPro version 9. The
other than CO2.
LCA impacts were characterized using TRACI 2.1. Pri-
mary energy consumption was characterized using the
The LCA of the Catalyst Building was performed based
CED method. The data used in the CLT LCA included
on material quantities provided by Katerra. Back-
primary and secondary data, meaning that some data
ground LCA data were taken from Athena Impact Esti-
were collected from the manufacturing facility and
mator version 5.2, using life cycle stage A impacts only.
some data were collected based on LCA research.
Some EPDs were needed to provide the LCA impacts of
Specifically, the LCA data for life cycle stage A1 was
certain materials or products that were not available in
taken from an LCA for Canadian lumber production
Athena. Concrete LCA data were based on actual mix
[5], while the LCA data for life cycle stages A2-A4 were
design submittals provided by Katerra, entered into Ath-
based on actual transportation distances and manu-
ena’s custom concrete mix design module. For opera-
facturing processes. This study treated biogenic carbon
tional energy, the energy use intensity (EUI) for the final
in accordance with the North America Product Cat-
design of the building was provided by the mechanical
egory Rule [6] and the default TRACI impact method.
Under the carbon neutrality assumption of wood prod- contractor.
4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Due to space constraints, only the results for the global After performing the LCA of Katerra’s CLT, the research
warming potential (GWP) for life cycle stage A, also team made the following key observations and rec-
known as embodied carbon, are shown in this summary ommendations that could further increase production
document. The full project report with more detailed efficiency and reduce environmental impacts:
results is available.1 1. Currently, the average distance between Katerra’s
CLT facility and the sawmills is approximately 328 km.
CLT LCA If Katerra could source the lumber within a 100-km
radius, the overall GWP of the CLT could be reduced
The full analysis had considered a baseline model and
by as much as 10%.
a conservative model. The overall GWP result from the
2. Currently, the lumber purchased by Katerra is round-
baseline model is 130 kg CO2e/m3, and overall GWP
edged, which requires additional cutting to square
result from the conservative model is 158 kg CO2e/m3.
the edges before CLT can be produced, leading to
Figure 3 presents a contribution analysis for the conser-
additional waste. Material loss can be reduced sig-
vative model. This figure shows that of the four process-
nificantly if the CLT lamstock procurement process
es, onsite CLT manufacturing has the greatest impact,
can be streamlined.
followed by lumber production, lumber transport, then
3. Currently, to reduce the moisture content from 19%
CLT transportation. The top three subprocesses are lum-
to 12%, the lumber is dried at Katerra’s CLT facility
ber manufacturing, lumber infeed, then panel finishing.
using a natural gas kiln (note that in Figure 3, this dry-
ing step occurs under “Onsite CLT Manufacturing” >
At the time of conducting this research, the CLT facility
“Lumber Infeed”). An alternative method for reduc-
was not operating at full capacity, but this capacity is
ing the environmental impact of drying would be to
expected to increase in the future. At full capacity, this
dry the lumber at the sawmill using hog fuel, which is
facility is expected to be more efficient than smaller
a waste product of lumber production.
facilities, potentially leading to lower environmental
impacts per unit volume of CLT produced.
P roc ess Sub p roc ess

A 1 : L umb er F orestry O p era on
P roduc on L og T ransp orta on
L umb er M anuf ac turi ng
A 2 : L umb er T ransp ort L umb er T ransp ort
A 3 : O nsi te C L T L umb er I nf eed
M anuf ac turi ng F i ng er J oi nt
Board Sor ng
L ayup and A dh esi v e
P ress
P anel F i ni sh i ng
0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0
G W P ( k g C O 2 e/ m3 )
Figure 3. GWP results of CLT LCA (conservative model) per cubic meter of CLT produced.
1
The full project report can be found at www.katerra.com and www.carbonleadershipforum.org/projects/katerra
5
Catalyst Building LCA tion, then lateral system. Within the enclosure, the wall
system has the greatest proportion of impacts, followed
Figure 4 presents the GWP results of the Catalyst Build-
by roof then subgrade. By item type, the highest-im-
ing by building component, color-coded by material
pact items in the building are:
category. Overall, the structure has a greater impact
1. CLT structural slabs (not including topping slabs)
than the enclosure, as is typical in buildings. Within the
2. Glulam beams and columns
structural system, the gravity system has the greatest
3. Acoustic underlayment, topping slab, and mat foun-
proportion of impacts, followed by subgrade, founda-
dation (concrete-type products)
C ateg ory Sub c ateg ory I tem

Struc ture G rav i ty system A c ous c underl ayment M ateri al s, g roup ed
Beams and c ol umns A l umi num
C ol umns C onc rete
C onnec ons C rush ed roc k
F i rep roo ng p ai nt E x truded p ol ystyrene
G i rders G l ass mat g yp sum p anel
Sl ab G l az i ng
T op p i ng sl ab G rout
L ateral system BR Bs I ntumesc ent p ai nt
Sh ear w al l s M i neral w ool b oard
Sub g rade Sl ab - on- g rade P ol yi so f oam i nsul a on
Sl ab - on- g rade underl ayment P ol yureth ane
Sub g rade c ol umns Steel
Sub g rade w al l s and f oo ng s Steel i nsul ated p anel
Susp ended sl ab s T erra c o a
F ounda on C ol umn f oo ng s T ex l es and memb ranes
M at f ounda on W ood
E nc l osure W al l A i r b arri er
C arri er rai l s
E x teri or g l az i ng
E x teri or mul l i ons
E x teri or w al l
F i ni sh
H at c h annel s
I nsul ated p anel
I nsul a on
R oof A dh esi v e
I nsul a on b ui l d- up
R i g i d b oard
R oof C L T
U nderl ayment memb rane
W aterp roo ng
Sub g rade I nsul a on
W aterp roo ng
0 1 0 2 0 3 0
G W P ( k g C O 2 e/ m2 )
Figure 4. GWP results (life cycle stage A) of Catalyst Building LCA, normalized by total floor area of the building.
6
Figure 5 presents the GWP results, masses, and volumes The left-most chart in this figure shows that wood and
of the material groups within the Catalyst Building concrete have the highest GWP impacts and that
ranked in descending GWP impact. Note that in the their contributions are nearly equal. In comparison,
volume analysis, the volumes of membranes and liquids the center and right-most charts in this figure show that
(textiles and membranes, polyurethane, and intumes- concrete has a significantly higher overall mass than
cent paint) were omitted due time constraints and lack wood but a lower overall volume on this project. Gen-
of readily-available information. However, the volumes erally, this figure shows that GWP impacts of materials
of these items are likely to be insignificant in the context in a building are not necessarily correlated with mass or
of the whole building. volume.
M ateri al s, g roup ed
W ood M ateri al s, g roup ed
C onc rete W ood
C onc rete
Steel
Steel
G l az i ng
G l az i ng
A l umi num
A l umi num
Steel i nsul ated p anel
Steel i nsul ated p anel
P ol yi so f oam i nsul a on
T ex l es and memb ranes
P ol yureth ane
P ol yureth ane
I ntumesc ent p ai nt
I ntumesc ent p ai nt
T erra c o a
T erra c o a
E x truded p ol ystyrene E x truded p ol ystyrene
G l ass mat g yp sum p anel G l ass mat g yp sum p anel
C rush ed roc k C rush ed roc k
M i neral w ool b oard M i neral w ool b oard
G rout G rout
0 2 0 4 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3
G W P
( k g C O 2 e/ m2 ) M ass ( k g / m2 ) V ol ume ( m3 / m2 )
Figure 5. GWP results (life cycle stage A), masses, and volumes of the Catalyst Building LCA, ranked by the overall
impact of material groups, normalized by total floor area of the building.
Figure 6 (next page) presents a plot of GWP vs mass, which is essentially rock. Both concrete and wood have
providing a sense of carbon intensity per kilogram in fairly high GWP and masses on the project, which is
the quantities seen in the building. Note that carbon reasonable because they form the primary structure of
intensity per unit of mass is not an indication of carbon the building.
intensity per functional unit of material. Items that have
relatively high carbon intensity per unit mass (in the The research team also performed a basic calculation
upper left portion of the graph) are: of biogenic carbon storage and found that the car-
• Exterior glazing (glass) bon stored in the wood components of the building is
• Insulated metal panel (steel and polyiso) approximately 204 kg CO2/m2. This nearly offsets the
• Carrier rails (aluminum) total embodied carbon impact of the building, which
is 207 kg CO2e/m2. However, a more comprehensive
One item that has relatively low carbon intensity (low analysis, including end-of-life considerations, should be
GWP but high mass) is slab-on-grade underlayment, performed in order to draw more definitive conclusions.
7
M ateri al s, g roup ed
2 0 Sl ab C L T
A l umi num
Beams and c ol umns
C onc rete
C rush ed roc k
E x truded p ol ystyrene
1 5
G l ass mat g yp sum p anel
G W P ( k g C O 2 e/ m2 )
G l az i ng
T op p i ng sl ab
E x teri or g l az i ng G rout
M at f ounda on
1 0 I nsul ated p anel I ntumesc ent p ai nt
C arri er rai l s
M i neral w ool b oard
I nsul a on Sl ab G L T Sl ab - on- g rade
R oof C L T P ol yureth ane
F i rep roo ng p ai nt
5 Sh ear w al l s Steel
W aterp roo ng Steel i nsul ated p anel
C ol umn f oo ng s T erra c o a
Sl ab - on- g rade underl ayment
0
W ood
0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0
M ass ( k g / m2 )
Figure 6. Plot of GWP results (life cycle stage A) versus mass in the Catalyst Building LCA. Only select items are
labeled due to space constraints.
POTENTIAL FUTURE WORK ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

After conducting this study, the research team noted The research team would like to thank Hans-Erik Blomgren
additional opportunities to refine this analysis of Kater- of Katerra for his role in initiating this research study and
ra’s CLT. Possible future work includes: fostering collaboration between Katerra and the Univer-
• Collect more data from the factory after a year of sity of Washington.
operations. The factory had just begun production
when this study was performed, and additional data This research work was funded by Katerra.
would lead to a more accurate LCA model.
• Develop more supply-chain specific LCA data for Cover photo credit: Andrew Giammarco
the softwood lumber production of the CLT LCA.
• Develop LCA estimates for CLT panels of varying PROJECT TEAM
panel widths.
• Develop LCA estimates for locally-sourced wood The Carbon Leadership Forum in the Department of Ar-
species. chitecture, University of Washington:
• Explore improving the lamstock procurement plan, • Kate Simonen, AIA, SE, Associate Professor (PI)
based on specific CLT requirements (e.g. specific • Monica Huang, EIT, Research Engineer
moisture content, panel width, mechanical property
specifications, etc.) The Center for International Trade in Forest Products in
• Incorporate the local electricity grid data into ener- the School of Forest and Environmental Sciences, Univer-
gy calculations. The research team used general- sity of Washington:
ized eGrid data to model electricity impacts, as this • Indroneil Ganguly, Ph.D., Associate Professor (Co-PI)
is common and widely-accepted practice in LCAs. • Francesca Pierobon, Ph.D., Research Associate
However, with more time and data, the research • Cindy X. Chen, Ph.D., Research Associate
team could refine the model to reflect the local
electricity grid.
8
REFERENCES
[5] Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. (2018). A Cra-
[1] Chen, C. X., Pierobon, F., & Ganguly, I. (2019). Life dle-to-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Canadian Sur-
Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Cross-Laminated Timber faced Dry Softwood Lumber. Retrieved from http://
(CLT) produced in Western Washington: The role of www.athenasmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/
logistics and wood species mix. Sustainability (Swit- CtoG-LCA-of-Canadian-Surfaced-Dry-Softwood-
zerland), 11(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051278 Lumber.pdf
[2] Puettmann, M., Sinha, A., & Ganguly, I. (2017). [6] FPInnovations. (2015). Product Category Rules (PCR)
Life Cycle Assessment of Cross Laminated Timbers for North America Structural and Architectural
Produced in Oregon. Retrieved from https://corrim. Wood Products. Retrieved from https://fpinnova-
org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Life-Cycle-Assess- tions.ca
ment-of-Oregon-Cross-Laminated-Timber.pdf
COPYRIGHT
[3] Structurlam (2013). Environmental Product Dec-
laration: CrossLam (TM) by Structurlam. Retrieved The Life Cycle Assessment of Katerra’s CLT and Catalyst
from https://www.structurlam.com/wp-content/ Building: Summary Document is licensed under a Cre-
uploads/2016/10/Structurlam-R-EPD.CrossLamC- ative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
LT-APA-SLP-2013.pdf
[4] Simonen, K., Rodriguez, B. X., McDade, E., & Strain,

L. (2017). Embodied Carbon Benchmark Study: LCA
for Low Carbon Construction. Seattle, WA: Carbon
Leadership Forum. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.
net/1773/38017
Interior of Catalyst Building under construction. Photo credit: Andrew Giammarco.
9
The “Rise of the On-Demand
Economy” Webinar will begin
shortly
Tuesday, June 30th, 2015
2pm NYC
Q&A
If you have questions, you can ask them at anytime via the “Questions tab.” We
will do our best to answer them live and will also save a few to answer at the end.
Twitter
Share interesting insights or data points you hear on Twitter using the hashtag
#ondemandnext. We are @cbinsights.`
@cbinsights #ondemandnext www.cbinsights.com

Webinar recording will be
distributed immediately after
The presentation will also be sent to you. Feel free to share
with colleagues. The resolution of some slides may be
suboptimal due to the webinar software. Those slides will
During the webinar, technical help is also available
http://support.citrixonline.com/en_US/Webinar

Join the conversation on
Twitter
Share your favorite insights & data points on Twitter
@cbinsights
#ondemandnext
About Our Presenter – Matthew Wong
.
@mlcwong mwong@cbinsights.com
• Research Analyst, CB Insights
• Published research and data analysis have been featured

in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Financial
Times, Bloomberg among other major media outlets.
• TV appearances on Al-Jazeera, Bloomberg TV, and BNN.
• Graduate of Northwestern University with B.S., magna cum

laude, in Political Science and Journalism
@cbinsights
@cbinsights #ondemandnext www.cbinsights.com 4

The Rise of the On-
Demand Economy
A data-driven look at the trends and emerging players in the burgeoning on-
demand landscape. Who will arise as winners?
@cbinsights

About CB Insights
A unique combination of data science and machine learning to help you see what’s next.
About CB Insights
Backed by the National Science Foundation, CB Insights uses data science and machine learning to help
our customers predict what’s next—their next customer, their next investment, the next market they
should attack, the next move of their competitor or the next company they should acquire.
The world’s leading global corporations

including the likes of Cisco, Salesforce,
Castrol and Gartner as well as top tier
VCs including, NEA, Upfront Ventures,
RRE, and FirstMark Capital rely on CB
Insights to make decisions based on
data, not decibels.
To make your life easier, visit

http://www.cbinsights.com
”A detailed discussion of data collection and how the company parses them is written by CB Insights’
@cbinsights
data scientists; it convincingly tells the story of scalability and accuracy for what they call “The
Cruncher.”
From “Predictive Analytics And Novel Visualization Draw Customers To 'Must Have' Data” published April 8, 2015

A few of our happy customers See what other customers have to say at
http://www.cbinsights.com/customer-love
The most publicly reference-able customers of anyone in the industry
“CB Insights' intuitive user interface, analytical “We're using CB Insights at Salesforce Ventures to
capabilities, and detailed investment information analyze industry trends that are relevant to our
create a very powerful tool for our team's research strategy. It's helped improve our efficiency.”
needs.”
Nate D’Anna Matt Garratt

Corporate Development Sr. Director, Corporate Development
Cisco Salesforce Ventures
“CB Insights provides our team with a holistic and

thematic approach that really captures market “Designed by a VC insider who truly knows the
activity….we've found CBI to have the best access for space and understands end-user needs.”
the most accurate market view.”
Jack Leeney Greg Bae

Portfolio Manager Investments & Biz Dev
Telefonica Ventures Comcast Ventures
“We have been looking for a tool that could give “CB Insights perfectly illustrates what I expect today
us the ability to track, research and identify from such online services to stay tuned to our fast-
investment opportunities. CB Insights provides changing Tech Landscape. Accurate and up-to-date
this simply and in a simple, easy to use interface. data mash-ups, intuitive UIs, smart data
The depth of information that we get is exactly visualization capabilities and direct API access… all
what we need. Great product.” packaged together with straightforward pricing.”
Jonathan Tudor Simon Mencarelli

Ventures Director Senior Manager, Strategic Planning
Castrol innoVentures Dassault Systems

In God we trust,
all others must
bring data

IN THE NEXT 35-45 MINUTES, WE’LL COVER…
1 The booming on-demand space

Financing trends to U.S. and international on-demand startups
The growing class of investors

2 Who’s who in on-demand investing? Who are the “unusual
suspects” and crossover investors moving in?
Momentum within on-demand – areas &
3
companies
What are the hot areas within on-demand, and which companies
have traction?
4 Case study – Whole Foods Market

Resource allocation is strategy. How has Whole Foods moved
strategically in the on-demand economy? Who else is at risk?
5 Where is on-demand headed next?

Where are the next innovations in on-demand

THE BOOMING ON-DEMAND SPACE
Everything on-demand

WHAT IS AN ON-DEMAND STARTUP?
“Applications that aggregate demand on mobile

devices but fulfill that demand through offline
services.”

ON-DEMAND EVERYTHING House
calls
Transportation Marijuana Food / Grocery Delivery Laundry
Home Services
Travel & Lounging Shipping Parking
Health & Beauty

THE ON-DEMAND ECONOMY: $9.4B RAISED AND
RISING
From $57M in 2010 to over $4B in 2014. YoY funding jumped 514% to hit $4.12B in 2014.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/research-on-demand-report

THE ON-DEMAND ECONOMY IS BIGGER THAN
UBER…
On-demand startups minus Uber have raised $3.89B across 250+ deals since 2010. 2015 is
on pace for a funding record that could more than double 2014’s total.

…BUT UBER HAS RAISED MORE THAN ALL OTHER
ON-DEMAND STARTUPS COMBINED
Uber’s $5.5B raised is 28% more than all other U.S. on-demand mobile services combined.
The chart below highlights the “power law”-like distribution of funding totals to U.S. on-
demand companies.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/uber-bigger-entire-on-demand-economy/

THE BUSINESS SOCIAL GRAPH
The Business Social Graph lets you visualize the investment, acquisition, competitor and
partner & customer relationships between players in a space. It makes mapping an
understanding an ecosystem dead simple.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/business-social-network

FOMO VENTURES? VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTORS
ARE HERDING INTO ON-DEMAND STARTUPS
20 unique VC investors in the on-demand economy in 2010. Now 198 and rising.

ARE THE BIGGEST ON-DEMAND COMPANIES
ALREADY IN EXISTENCE?
In 2010, 7 of every 10 deals in the on-demand economy came at the Angel / Seed stage. But
the space is maturing. In 2014, 31% of deals were at the Series A, while Series B deal share
hit a five-year high in 2014.

ON-DEMAND DEAL SIZES BLOW PAST TYPICAL
MOBILE DEALS
On-demand mobile startups have seen larger checks than the average mobile software deal
size – most notably at the Series A and Series B stages.

ON-DEMAND HAS SEEN FEW EXITS TO DATE
Fewer than 10 to date.
Source: CB Insights

THERE HAVE BEEN CASUALTIES – AND STARTUPS
THAT HAVE LOST MOMENTUM

THE INCREASINGLY CROWDED FOOD DELIVERY
MARKET
Dozens of U.S.-based companies are following the same two basic business models:
delivering either prepared meals or “cooking boxes,” with ingredients and instructions.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/food-delivery-startups-crowded-market/

ON-DEMAND STARTUP WATCHLIST
Using CB Insights company search, we identified a few startups that haven’t raised funding in
more than a year and who may be worth keeping an eye on for hiring/M&A purposes.
Last funding
Company Description
date
On-demand home cleaning app. Recently reported

December
to be on the block with Handy and Helpling
2013
expressing earlier interest.
Online and mobile marketplace for small jobs and

July 2012 tasks. Went through restructuring in 2013.
On-demand prepared meals app. Rivals Sprig and

May 2014 Munchery have each raised $45M+ rounds in recent
months. Shut down in Seattle only 4 months after launch.
On-demand laundry delivery startup that last raised

December funding in 2013. Space has since seen Rinse, Washio and
2013 Cleanly all raise VC funding.
Source: CB Insights

ON-DEMAND IS A GLOBAL PHENOMENON: $2B
RAISED IN 2015 YTD
Over 55 deals to international on-demand startups so far this year.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/international-on-demand-uber-for-x-trends/

CHINA AND INDIA LEAD THE WAY
China and India dominate international on-demand financing with 40+ deals each since 2012
and a combined $4B in equity financing raised.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/international-on-demand-uber-for-x-trends/

UBER HAS ALSO OUT-RAISED ALL INTERNATIONAL
ON-DEMAND STARTUPS COMBINED
While international taxi-hailing apps including Kuaidi, GrabTaxi and Olacabs have raised huge
sums, Uber has raised 6% more funding than all other international on-demand startups
combined.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/uber-funding-tops-international-on-demand-startups/

Where is all this data from?
The CB Insights platform has the details on each and
every on-demand mobile deal in this webinar deck.
Some of our happy customers

ON-DEMAND INVESTOR ANALYSIS
Who is most active, who are the unusual suspects

AN ATTRACTIVE MARKET MEANS THE SMART
MONEY IS INCREASINGLY ACTIVE
Some VC investors (top decile funds) are good at seeing around corners
Source: CB Insights

ON-DEMAND IS ATTRACTING A WIDE RANGE OF
STRATEGICS (AND SOME UNUSUAL SUSPECTS)
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/tiger-cubs-investments/

MAJOR CORPORATIONS ARE PLACING BETS ON ON-
DEMAND STARTUPS
Google Ventures has done 11 on-demand deals to 5 companies in the last 5 years
Corporate Investor On-Demand Investments / Acquisitions

PACK OF HEDGE FUNDS AND MUTUAL FUNDS ALSO
MOVING IN AT THE LATE-STAGE
And in some cases earlier.
Crossover Investor On-Demand Investments

TIGER CUB BUSINESS SOCIAL GRAPH HIGHLIGHTS
E-HAILING INTEREST
Hedge funds Valiant Capital, Glade Brook, Lone Pine, Falcon Edge, Coatue Management and
Tiger Global have made bets on e-hailing startups in the U.S. and/or internationally.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/tiger-cubs-investments/

WHICH VC INVESTORS ARE MOST ACTIVE IN ON-
DEMAND? See all the most active on-demand investors by
stage in the On-Demand Report
VC Investor Select On-Demand Investments

WHICH VC INVESTORS ARE MOST ACTIVE IN ON-
DEMAND? See all the most active on-demand investors by
stage in the On-Demand Report
VC Investor Select On-Demand Investments

THE STARTUP CHALLENGERS
Emerging companies with momentum

COMPANY MOSAIC – ILLIQUID DOESN’T HAVE TO
MEAN OPAQUE
Assessing the health of opaque private companies using public data. The National Science
Foundation has funded the development of Company Mosaic.
What is Company Mosaic?
Quantitative framework to algorithmically

measure the overall health and growth potential
of private companies.
Companies scored on a 0 to 1000 scale.
It tracks 3 Ms for each company based on non-

traditional signals such as:
• Momentum – Uses signals ranging from

hiring growth, exec turnover, news volume
and sentiment, customer & partner signings,
product development velocity, web traffic,
mobile app data, and social media chatter
• Market – Uses Market Mosaic to assess

health of industry the company competes in
• Money – Financial strength and viability of

@cbinsights company based on burn rate, financing
history and investor quality

COMPANY MOSAIC IN REALITY
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/c-8e02f73ba9044458c5168ebf6883a423?term=munchery

HIGH COMPANY MOSAIC SCORES -
TRANSPORTATION
These transportation companies have a strong Mosaic trend. They’re in the top 10% of
companies based on their Company Mosaic scores.
Company
Company Recent Headlines / Highlights
Mosaic Score
980
950
890
800

HIGH COMPANY MOSAIC SCORES – PARKING
These parking companies have demonstrated consistent Mosaic strength. They’re in the top
10% of companies based on their Company Mosaic scores.
Company
Mosaic Score
840
820
810
750

HIGH COMPANY MOSAIC SCORES – FOOD
DELIVERY
These food delivery companies have demonstrated consistent Mosaic strength. They’re in
the top 10% of companies based on their Company Mosaic scores.
Company
Mosaic Score
950
950
920
920

CASE STUDY:

JANUARY 2013: WHOLE FOODS EYES FRESHDIRECT
FOR NEXT STEPS
“(FreshDirect) is definitely a serious competitor

for Whole Foods and they definitely price against
us and we do pay attention to them and study
them. I’m not saying we are going to get into the
Internet/home delivery business like they are but
if anyone figures it out, it’ll probably be
FreshDirect.”
- John Mackey, Whole

Foods CEO, January 17,
2013, Talk at 92Y
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b/e5922400-e92f-4da7-b52a-c862c47f24bc

WHOLE FOODS FORMS NOTABLE ON-DEMAND
PARTNERSHIPS OVER TIME
Whole Foods Ventures into On-Demand Grocery Delivery
Test (no partnership)
@cbinsights
Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Date of Partnership
WHOLE FOODS LIST OF PARTNERSHIPS
Company Date Description
Postmates adds Whole Foods

October 12, to ‘Get It Now’ app for menu of
2012 items that can be purchased
and delivered in an hour.
Whole Foods is an early test
September 25,
partner of Google Shopping
2013 Express
Instacart and Whole Foods

September 8, partner to offer one-hour
2014 delivery across 15-major cities
DoorDash begins delivering

June 12, groceries from Whole Foods in
2015 the LA area
Test (no partnership)

2015: WHOLE FOODS A MAJOR GROCERY DELIVERY
PLAYER
“The early read is very positive,
indicating a 100 percent increase in
awareness for our target audience with
increases in both value perception and
intent to shop versus our measured
competitors. We are now providing
fresh grocery delivery options to more
homes in America than any other food
retailer. Since announcing our 15-
market partnership with Instacart in
September, our average weekly online
delivery sales have already passed the
$1 million mark.”
- John Mackey, Whole

Foods CEO on Q4 2014
Earnings Call
Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2014/11/06/whole-foods-cio-says-apple-pay-instacart-paying-off/

THE FASTER PACE OF DISRUPTION
Why incumbent players need to move quickly

IT’S HARDER THAN EVER TO STAY ON TOP…
The lifespan of an S&P 500 company is shorter and shorter.

TODAY’S EMERGING BUSINESS MODELS &
STARTUPS BECOME TOMORROW’S PROBLEMS
Source: Clay Christensen Disruptive Innovation Framework

INCUMBENTS ARE VALIDATING NEW ON-DEMAND
MODELS
Matt Maloney, CEO of

GrubHub, said new non-
restaurant kitchen food
delivery models a la
Munchery and Sprig are a
new opportunity for the $3B
company.
Maloney said orders from

delivery-only kitchens
comprise somewhere in the
low-single digits of current
orders but “expects the
segment to grow
exponentially in the near
future.”
Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2015/05/18/grubhub-looks-beyond-the-sit-down-restaurant-for-growth/

INCUMBENTS ARE VALIDATING NEW ON-DEMAND
MODELS
Source: http://skift.com/2015/06/01/hyatt-invests-in-onefinestay-to-figure-out-sharing-economy-appeal/

MOBILE IS ENABLING ON-DEMAND COMPANIES TO
EAT AWAY AT NON-TECH INDUSTRIES
AirBnB is poised to become more valuable than Marriott, Starwood, and Expedia.
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/airbnb-hospitality-industry-valuation-breakdown/

MOBILE IS ENABLING ON-DEMAND COMPANIES TO
EAT AWAY AT NON-TECH INDUSTRIES
Startups are invading the domain of FedEx and UPS
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/startups-disrupting-fedex-ups/

WHAT’S NEXT IN ON-DEMAND?

ON-DEMAND INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES
A growing set of emerging companies now provide tech and software to enable and facilitate
the end-to-end marketplaces that make up the on-demand economy.
“When a major new technology trend emerges – say,

the rise of online video or social media –
entrepreneurs can try to capitalize on the trend by
creating a consumer product (mining for gold), or by
creating tools to enable consumer products (selling
pickaxes). For most technology trends, the number of
successful companies created in gold mining and
pickaxes are comparable, yet the gold mining
businesses tend to get much more attention.”
- Chris Dixon,
Andreessen Horowitz,
Feb 5, 2011
Source: http://cdixon.org/2011/02/05/selling-pickaxes-during-a-gold-rush/

ON-DEMAND INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES
Route / vehicle optimization Background checks
& logistics
On-boarding / supply side Deep links / app

optimization / 1099 economy promotion
Source: CB Insights

HEALTHCARE
The rise of mobile healthcare on-demand. Converting bits to atoms (pharmacy delivery, house
calls, marijuana delivery and more).
Source: https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/mobile-healthcare-startups-list/

BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS
New modes of applying on-demand business models to corporations rather than individuals
are sprouting up.
Office Cleaning
Customer Service
Delivery/Logistics
Source: CB Insights

QUESTIONS, GETTING UNDERLYING
DATA & HELPFUL LINKS

HAVE QUESTIONS / WANT ACCESS TO THE
UNDERLYING DATA?
The underlying financing, acquisition, etc data in this presentation is available on CB Insights.
Not a Customer?
Our Customer Success Team
Reach out to your manager. If unsure, Reach out to Anand

email myself or Jonathan McKenna
anand.sanwal@cbinsights.com
jmckenna@cbinsights.com
or
anand.sanwal@cbinsights.com
Set up a free trial account
Existing Customer?

INVESTOR / ACQUIRER PROFILES
Investor/Acquirer Profile Link
SV Angel Investor Profile
SherpaVentures Investor Profile
Andreessen Horowitz Investor Profile

INVESTOR / ACQUIRER PROFILES
Investor/Acquirer Profile Link
First Round Capital Investor Profile
Google Ventures Investor Profile

COMPANY PROFILES – HIGH MOSAIC SCORES
Company
Company Company profile page
Mosaic Score
980 Uber Company Profile Page
950 Lyft Company Profile Page
890 Getaround Company Profile Page
800 Shuddle Company Profile Page

Company
Company Company profile page
Mosaic Score
840 Zirx Company Profile Page
820 Spothero Company Profile Page
Luxe Company Profile Page

810
ParkWhiz Company Profile Page

750

Company
Mosaic Score
950 DoorDash Company Profile Page
950 Munchery Company Profile Page
920 Sprig Company Profile Page
920 Postmates Company Profile Page

About Our Presenter – Matthew Wong
.
@mlcwong mwong@cbinsights.com
• Research Analyst, CB Insights
• Published research and data analysis have been featured

in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Financial
Times, Bloomberg among other major media outlets.
• TV appearances on Al-Jazeera, Bloomberg TV, and BNN.
• Graduate of Northwestern University with B.S., magna cum

laude, in Political Science and Journalism
@cbinsights

Web | www.cbinsights.com
Twitter | @cbinsights
Tel | 212.292.3148

Industry Research 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Industry Research 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

'327869'8-328)',

“Think of the fundamental value chain of venture

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7II[LEXSXLIVGYWXSQIVWLEZIXSWE]EXLXXT[[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQGYWXSQIVPSZI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

We’ll be analyzing how private companies are

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL *6)( [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL *6)( [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 1G/MRWI] [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 'SRWXVYGXMSR(MZI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

    

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

   

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

Corporates don’t just

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7SYVGI)UYMTQIRX;SVPH [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

.ER– (IGIQFIV .ER– 3GXSFIV 'EXIVTMPPEVMWVEQTMRKYT

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

XVIEXQIRX [LIIP ZEPZI WTIIH TSWMXMSR GSQTSRIRX KVSYRH ZEPZI

WMKREP QSXSV EWTLEPX XVERWQMWWMSR STIVEXSV TVIWWYVI XMT WMHITPEXI

XVIEXQIRXHIZMGI TS[IV JYIP QSXSV XMVI TYQT ZEPZI TSWMXMSR

EVQEXYVI VIEVTSVXMSR [LIIP FVEOI KVSYRH XVEGO GSQFYWXMSR WMKREPMRHMGEXMZI

QSYRX JYIP QSXSV XERO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ JPYMH FSH] MRHMGEXMZI

WLSZIP GSQTSRIRX TVIWWYVI TVIWWYVI FSH] KVMPPI FIEVMRK JYIP

TEWWEKI XVEGO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ TPEXI ZEPZI FSH] GLEQFIV WIGSRHIRH

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

XVIEXQIRX [LIIP ZEPZI WTIIH TSWMXMSR GSQTSRIRX KVSYRH ZEPZI

WMKREP QSXSV EWTLEPX XVERWQMWWMSR STIVEXSV TVIWWYVI XMT WMHITPEXI

XVIEXQIRXHIZMGI TS[IV JYIP QSXSV XMVI TYQT ZEPZI TSWMXMSR

EVQEXYVI VIEVTSVXMSR [LIIP FVEOI KVSYRH XVEGO GSQFYWXMSR WMKREPMRHMGEXMZI

QSYRX JYIP QSXSV XERO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ JPYMH FSH] MRHMGEXMZI

WLSZIP GSQTSRIRX TVIWWYVI TVIWWYVI FSH] KVMPPI FIEVMRK JYIP

TEWWEKI XVEGO GSRXVSPW]WXIQ TPEXI ZEPZI FSH] GLEQFIV WIGSRHIRH

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 8LI6IEP(IEP [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&PSK [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL &VMXMWL'SPYQFME0E[-RWXMXYXI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL ,SY^^ [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL .&/RS[PIHKI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 2=(EMP]2I[W&PY,SQIW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL MQEXIVMEPMWI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 1G/MRWI] [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7XEXMWXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ 

Briefing recording will be distributed

The presentation will also be sent to you.

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7II[LEXSXLIVGYWXSQIVWLEZIXSWE]EXLXXT[[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQGYWXSQIVPSZI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL *6)( [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL *6)( [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 1G/MRWI] [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 'SRWXVYGXMSR(MZI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7SYVGI)UYMTQIRX;SVPH [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

.ER– (IGIQFIV .ER– 3GXSFIV 'EXIVTMPPEVMWVEQTMRKYT

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&YWMRIWW7SGMEP+VETL [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW4EXIRX(EXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 8LI6IEP(IEP [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW&PSK [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL &VMXMWL'SPYQFME0E[-RWXMXYXI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL ,SY^^ [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL .&/RS[PIHKI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 2=(EMP]2I[W&PY,SQIW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL '&-RWMKLXW8VIRHW [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL MQEXIVMEPMWI [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 1G/MRWI] [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ

GSRWXVYGXMSRXIGL 7XEXMWXE [[[GFMRWMKLXWGSQ