The Epicenter defines infrastructure as the physical, economic, and social systems central to the functioning of an economy and a society. Resiliency in critical infrastructure is about the ability to withstand extreme climate impacts and recover from them quickly.
If $1 invested in disaster prep saves $13, then it's clear investing in preparedness produces a higher ROI than recovery. But what does that preparation look like? An interview with Nanotech Materials offers an example of resiliency in the category of fortified roofing and building materials.
If each $1 invested in disaster preparation saves $13 in economic costs, damages, and cleanup, then it's clear that investing in the preparation for climate-related catastrophes produces a higher ROI than just focusing on recovery alone. But what, exactly, does that preparation look like?
If $1 invested in disaster prep saves $13, then it's clear investing in preparedness produces a higher ROI than recovery. But what does that preparation look like? An interview with Nanotech Materials offers an example of resiliency in the category of fortified roofing and building materials.
Recently, Maddie Vann from The Epicenter team sat down for an interview with Carrie Horazeck, Chief Commercial Officer for Nanotech Materials, and Troy Marshall, VP of Fire Proofing for Nanotech Materials.
Seven key highlights from the interview offer insights into challenges with traditional fire mitigation and cool roof materials and summarize opportunities that the conversation revealed. The full interview is here.
Have ideas for a solution The Epicenter should spotlight? Email us!
Maddie Vann: Nanotech develops materials to protect real estate from climate threats like extreme heat and fire. Can you give us an overview of what Nanotech does?
Carrie Horazeck: Our core technology is a proprietary particle, resembling white silica sand, developed by our Chief Material Scientist, Professor Claudinei Calado, a thermodynamics expert from São Paulo, Brazil.
This particle has two key thermal properties:
Inspired by aerospace technology, it offers a simpler, more durable alternative to traditional thermal resistance materials, which often degrade quickly, contain toxic chemicals, and require frequent re-application. Our no VOC particle integrates seamlessly into carriers like epoxies, resins, and polyurethanes—without altering their fundamental properties.
Our flagship roof coating can now cover millions of square feet per year, and our fire mitigation coating is targeting all 11 fire-prone states. We’re also working closely with the California Department of Transportation, which has been highly receptive to our innovations.
At our core, we focus on combating heat. Our mission is to become the world’s most thermally efficient company–developing coatings that range from cool roof solutions that improve HVAC efficiency to high-performance fire protection for wildfire-prone areas.
Maddie Vann: Nanotech focuses on fireproofing technology and cool roof technology. Can you start by telling me what’s unique about your fireproofing, or fire mitigation, technology?
Troy Marshall: Over the years, I’ve seen fire mitigation technology evolve, but one thing that hasn’t changed is the reliance on toxic chemicals. Large manufacturers have made incremental improvements—reducing VOCs, improving application processes—but they haven’t fundamentally changed the chemistry. Most fireproofing materials still contain hazardous compounds, which release toxic fumes when burned. In fact, smoke inhalation from these chemicals is a leading cause of fire-related fatalities.
Traditional solutions rely on intumescent coatings, which work by charring and swelling when exposed to heat. However, these coatings contain toxic chemicals and may not activate at the right temperature for certain materials, making them unreliable in some situations. Additionally, once they activate, they can’t be reused.
Nanotech’s approach is entirely different. Our particle provides thermal protection without needing to char or swell. It remains inert in the coating, offering heat resistance above 3,272°F. Unlike traditional intumescent coatings, which emit toxic fumes and leach chemicals into the environment over time, our solution is non-toxic and reusable, making it a safer, more sustainable alternative.
Maddie Vann: That seems significant that Nanotech’s product is also reusable. Is it uncommon for traditional solutions to be used multiple times?
Troy Marshall: That’s exactly right. Intumescent coatings are single-use—they provide temporary protection during a fire but must be replaced afterward. With Nanotech, our coating remains effective even after multiple fire exposures. We test it daily in our lab, subjecting it to repeated burns, and it continues to perform.
Maddie Vann: That sounds like a major advantage—offering true resiliency by helping buildings withstand multiple fires rather than just delaying damage.
Troy Marshall: Absolutely. There’s also an environmental aspect to consider. Many coatings contain hazardous chemicals that not only release toxic fumes during fires but also leach into water systems over time. That’s why Nanotech’s Wildfire Shield is a game-changer—it provides fire protection without these harmful side effects.
Maddie Vann: Let’s shift now to a discussion of Nanotech’s cool roof technology. As heat becomes an increasingly deadly issue in the U.S., with 15 national heat records broken in 2024 alone, can you explain why Nanotech’s cool roof technology is critical in addressing this problem?
Carrie Horazeck: Absolutely. When we think about the challenges of heat mitigation, we categorize them into 1) long-term heat and 2) acute heat. Cool Roof fits into our long-term heat challenge, which is fundamentally about climate resiliency. The built environment faces significant challenges as the planet gets warmer, and this trend collides with current population growth and urban development.
We’re witnessing rapid urban population expansion worldwide, often outpacing the adoption of effective cooling technologies. This leads to the intensification of urban heat islands—areas where heat accumulates and becomes trapped, exacerbating health and safety concerns beyond just the impact of global temperature rise. While our company alone cannot solve global warming, we can contribute solutions to mitigate its local effects.
Urban heat islands trap heat, preventing it from dissipating effectively, which can lead to heat-related illnesses like heat stroke. From a business perspective, companies attempt to counteract this by increasing cooling capacity within buildings. The financial impact is clear: energy costs for buildings tend to skyrocket during the summer months. Here in Houston, this is a significant issue. The downtown area even has an extensive underground tunnel system, allowing people to move between buildings without being exposed to the extreme heat. If you visit Houston from late March to early September, you’ll notice very few pedestrians above ground—not because people aren’t there, but because they’re walking underground to escape the heat.
Businesses focus on controlling energy costs, but what many don’t realize is that increased HVAC usage directly contributes to Scope 2 carbon emissions—the emissions generated from purchased energy. As these emissions rise, they contribute to global warming, which in turn worsens the urban heat island effect. It’s a vicious cycle of heat amplification.
Cool Roof coatings offer a simple yet effective solution. Traditional cool coatings, which have been around since the early 2000s, rely on Solar Reflective Index (SRI) technology. This method primarily emphasizes reflectivity—making a roof as white as possible so it can bounce solar rays away and reduce heat absorption. While there is valid science behind this approach, it has significant drawbacks.
The biggest issue? White surfaces get dirty. When a cool roof coating accumulates dirt, its reflectivity—and therefore its thermal performance—declines. This is why cool roof technology is often dismissed in urban environments like New York City. A freshly painted white roof doesn’t stay white for long, rendering its reflective properties ineffective. Additionally, standard reflective coatings only address one-third of the solar radiation spectrum—visible light. They fail to manage ultraviolet (UV) and infrared radiation, which also contribute significantly to heat buildup.
Our approach improves on this traditional model. While we use the same pigmentation as our competitors for color, we integrate our patented particle technology into the coating. This creates a physical insulative barrier between the external environment and the roof surface, which is not dependent on color for its effectiveness. As a result, our performance does not degrade as the roof gets dirty.
Field data demonstrates that our technology can reduce the cooling load of a single-story metal building by up to 49%, and this reduction is maintained year over year. In contrast, standard reflective coatings typically achieve only a 15% reduction in cooling load in the first year, and that benefit declines annually. According to the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA), traditional cool roof coatings degrade at a rate of approximately 18% per year due to dirt accumulation.
Maddie Vann: That’s a notable difference—49% energy savings with your technology versus 15% and declining with standard reflective coatings.
Carrie Horazeck: Exactly. This makes us the only cool roof coating technology on the market that pays for itself—including both material and labor costs—within its warranty period. This represents a fundamental shift in how facility managers and operations teams think about their roofs. Instead of viewing the roof as a cost center—something that requires maintenance and replacement—they can see it as a tool for energy efficiency.
If a facility installs our coating and pays it off within a few years, the remaining years before reapplication generate pure energy cost savings. Our technology offers ‘sustainability with a return’—cutting both operating costs and carbon emissions.
Beyond HVAC reduction, we also have applications for non-temperature-controlled environments, where the primary concern is worker safety. In regions like the Middle East, companies operate under ‘black flag laws,’ which require work to pause if indoor temperatures exceed a certain threshold, due to the risk of heat stroke. Similar concerns arose in the U.S. last summer when the Teamsters strike highlighted extreme heat conditions inside delivery vans from companies like UPS, Amazon, FedEx, and DHL.
We’ve developed a version of our coating for vehicles and non-temperature-controlled buildings, which helps maintain internal temperatures at ambient levels. This means that if it’s 90°F outside, it will also be 90°F inside, rather than experiencing a 20-30 degree internal heat buildup, as is common in metal structures. This dramatically improves safety for workers in extreme heat conditions.
Ultimately, our Cool Roof line addresses long-term heat mitigation by reducing reliance on HVAC systems and improving resilience against rising temperatures. By integrating our technology into roofs, vehicles, and industrial structures, we’re helping break the cycle of increasing cooling demands and worsening carbon emissions.
Maddie Vann: You mentioned that a big goal is to reduce HVAC usage over time. Are there also potential future construction benefits, where building owners realize that many existing HVAC units are oversized.
Carrie Horazeck: Yes, as this technology becomes more widely adopted, building owners will see that most HVAC units are larger than necessary. With future projects, developers will be able to install smaller, more appropriately sized HVAC units, reducing both upfront equipment costs and long-term energy consumption. Ultimately, this leads to lower global carbon emissions as HVAC unit sizes decrease and results in more efficient building designs, particularly in industries with large real estate portfolios.
Maddie Vann: You and I previously spoke about the 179D tax code and how it tracks energy efficiency. How does that tie in here? Does it connect more broadly to how companies are currently incentivized to calculate carbon emissions?
Carrie Horazeck: Yeah, this is one of those classic cases where government tax codes aren’t keeping pace with private-sector innovation. And that’s not changing anytime soon. Right now, the energy modeling software required for 179D tax filings only allows for two metrics: 1) reflectivity and 2) insulation.
There’s no current way to account for low thermal conductivity in the tax code. The only way to demonstrate its impact is through long-term feasibility studies showing reduced carbon usage over time. We’re actively lobbying for updates to the code so that these newer technologies can be properly recognized.
Insulation is a great example of this limitation. The tax code measures insulation performance using R-value, which is based on thickness. Our coatings, by design, are applied in very thin layers—half a millimeter to a millimeter—unlike thick spray foam insulation. So our R-value appears low, even though we can maintain internal temperature stability comparable to R32 or R40 insulation. But the software used for tax filings is rigid and doesn’t have a way to account for that. We’re working with some great tax organizations to navigate this challenge.
But honestly, government incentives are more of a nice-to-have. Right now, our primary selling point is the direct cost savings—if I can cut 25–40% of your cooling costs this year, that’s what really matters.
If you can stack government incentives on top of that, great—it’s just extra value, but it’s not the main driver of adoption.
Maddie Vann: So given the financial benefits, and if government incentives aren’t the bottleneck preventing widespread adoption, why isn’t this already scaling across buildings nationwide?
Carrie Horazeck: The main constraint is simply where we are as a company. We’re only four years old and about to launch our Series A funding round. We launched the product just two years ago, and while we’ve seen strong revenue traction, our biggest challenge is simply scaling—getting more sales reps in the field and enough hours in the day to spread the message.
Maddie Vann: When we talk about this though, I can’t help but wonder—why wouldn’t every commercial building in the U.S. adopt cool roof technology? Whether it’s your nanotech solution or a similar cool roof technology, the cost savings seem profound. So is it just a matter of sales and awareness? Why hasn’t this scaled across every building in the country yet?
Carrie Horazeck: It mainly comes down to the upfront cost. Even though our technology isn’t expensive to apply, it still requires an initial capital expenditure (CapEx) in year one. Building owners then recoup that cost over time through energy savings, typically within three to seven years.
Most energy service companies (ESCOs) look for a three- to five-year payback period as a standard. We talk to Fortune 500 companies managing large property portfolios, and they have long-term maintenance plans already in place. For example, if they have 50 buildings, they may budget for 15 roof upgrades this year, 12 next year, and so on. That kind of planning slows widespread adoption because they’re working within pre-set budgets.
This is where government policy could make a big difference—just like it did with solar. If the government made these coatings effectively free upfront and recouped the cost through energy savings, adoption could skyrocket.
But for now, we’re operating in a private market where budgeting cycles determine when and how companies invest in efficiency upgrades.
Maddie Vann: In the wake of the Los Angeles fires, what is Nanotech doing to scale your fire solutions? Are you involved in any rebuilding efforts there?
Troy Marshall: Absolutely. We're a young company, but we have a unique solution for protecting high-value infrastructure—homes, hospitals, schools. Because it's a life safety solution, there’s a lot of regulatory red tape, including approvals, third-party testing, and certifications like those from Underwriters Laboratories. Achieving these certifications takes time and significant investment.
Fire mitigation involves rigorous testing that can take months or even years, so we made a strategic decision to start in markets with lower or no certification requirements. We know our solution will meet the highest standards, but we needed to gain traction first. We focused on open-air wood protection, particularly for critical infrastructure in wildfire-prone states.
Open-air wood is most vulnerable in wildfires, so we’ve been educating municipalities, fire marshals, and building code officials about the differences between traditional intumescent coatings and our insulated ceramic particle technology. Building a case history and generating revenue will allow us to complete the required third-party testing over time.
Wildfires are getting hotter and lasting longer, increasing costs for Departments of Transportation (DOTs), especially in fire-prone states like California. We’ve seen significant damage from fires like the Pacific Palisades Fire—destroyed roads, bridges, and highways.
In areas like Pacific Palisades, roads and bridges are reinforced with cement retaining walls or wood timber lagging walls. Non-protected wood in a wildfire ignites and must be removed, while the soil underneath must be evaluated for stability before rebuilding. Vegetation helps stabilize soil, but after a wildfire, much of it is gone, making reconstruction even more challenging.
Historically, concrete was considered fire-resistant, but wildfires now reach temperatures that compromise even concrete structures. With prolonged exposure, concrete can fail, just like wood.
We’ve partnered with Caltrans in California, the largest DOT in the U.S.—likely the world—which has adopted wood timber lagging for bridge and road shoring instead of concrete. Concrete is expensive, weather-dependent, and slower to install, whereas timber lagging is faster, safer, and more cost-effective. By applying our wildfire shield coating, we make it fire-resistant.
Over the past year, we’ve protected over 10,000 square feet across multiple projects and have several more in the pipeline. Given the recent fires, we expect significant emergency repair work.
One solution we’re exploring is pre-coating timber lagging offsite before shipping it for installation. This would speed up construction, especially when weather conditions aren’t ideal for on-site application.
California’s DOT sets the standard for many other states, particularly fire-prone ones like Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Montana, Colorado, and Arizona. Many of them follow Caltrans' lead, and we’re seeing increased interest in our wildfire protection methods.
We get inquiries daily—people asking if they can coat their homes or use our product for fire-rated walls in buildings. The answer is yes, but these applications require additional third-party certifications, like UL or ICC approvals. We’re actively working on those certifications, but until they’re secured, most fire marshals won’t approve their use in standard residential or commercial applications.
If we could streamline testing and certification, we could bring safer solutions to market faster. For now, we’re focused on DOT infrastructure because we have proven case studies and regulatory acceptance in that space.
The same timber lagging method used for DOT infrastructure could also be used to build fire-resistant barriers around communities in wildfire-prone areas. We’re in discussions with HOAs and Firewise communities that want to prevent disasters like those in Pacific Palisades and Malibu. Our wildfire progression barrier walls, protected with our coating, could serve as a frontline defense.
I just finished presenting to a community looking to become Firewise, along with their insurance providers, FAIR Plan representatives, and CAL FIRE officials. We introduced a new concept—wildfire shield emergency panels. These are fast-install panels that can be attached to homes or buildings in an emergency, similar to how hurricane-prone communities board up windows. The goal is to buy time for first responders to contain the fire before the structure is severely damaged. We had a lot of upfront interest and will be releasing a residential preparedness packet soon for communities looking to home harden.
We’re also in discussions with several municipalities about integrating emergency panels into their wildfire preparedness plans. The demand for smarter, faster fire protection is growing, and we’re committed to providing solutions that can help save both infrastructure and lives.
Carrie Horazeck: It's similar to what we discussed with Cool Roof—except fire is an acute problem. Most fire protection technologies focus on preventing fire from escaping a building. However, we got into wildfire mitigation because wildfire seasons are longer and more intense than ever. Our approach assumes the wildfire has already started and is heading your way. The question then becomes: How do you protect yourself and your infrastructure until it passes?
That’s why we focus on open-air wood protection—because when fires hit, critical infrastructure is at risk. Utility poles collapse, communications go down, and if those earth-shoring walls in Pacific Palisades fail, you get mini mudslides that block roads. So first responders can’t reach the fire, which makes everything worse. Our goal is not just protecting buildings but keeping critical infrastructure operational during a wildfire so people have time to evacuate safely.
Maddie Vann: Any final thoughts before we wrap up?
Troy Marshall: Just a big thank you for the interest. I’ve got trips planned out west in the coming weeks, and I’m excited to get on the ground and help make a difference with Wildfire Shield.
Carrie Horazeck: I’d just add that as a platform technology company, we rely on applicators—roofing contractors, thermal coating specialists, construction firms—boots on the ground. If you’re reading this, know that our success depends on strong partnerships. We grow by working with contractors who have relationships with government entities and commercial builders. Those relationships are everything to us.
Have ideas for a solution The Epicenter should spotlight? Email us!
The Epicenter defines infrastructure as the physical, economic, and social systems central to the functioning of an economy and a society. Resiliency in critical infrastructure is about the ability to withstand extreme climate impacts and recover from them quickly.
If each $1 invested in disaster preparation saves $13 in economic costs, damages, and cleanup, then it's clear that investing in the preparation for climate-related catastrophes produces a higher ROI than just focusing on recovery alone. But what, exactly, does that preparation look like?