The pandemic is driving demand for more efficient steam technology in 2021: • Competitiveness, rising energy bills and equipment strain from pandemic demand are top drivers for more efficient technology • Business uncertainty, lack of capex and lack of personnel are hindering green investments • 59% think it is difficult to hire staff with the skills required to operate or maintain a steam boiler because of the impact of Covid-19 The ability to adapt and recover sustainably and

productively will drive business’s demand for more efficient steam technology in 2021. That is the headline finding from Aggreko’s latest industry research, which surveyed over 200 organisations across the public and private sector. The research, which was commissioned in part to

determine how the global pandemic has reshaped business priorities, looked to establish how different factors are influencing uptake in the steam boiler market. Those interviewed included energy and production managers in manufacturing and petrochemical refineries, as well as facilities managers in hospitals and government departments. After the disruption that took place in 2020, it would be fair to assume most businesses

are reluctant to ear-mark budget for upgrades. Yet 68% of respondents said they were now more likely to invest in greener technology or new equipment to improve energy efficiency and emissions since the emergence of COVID-19. However, a number of businesses found the extra expense difficult to justify as the economic impact of the virus becomes clear. Just under 20% said they were now less likely to invest in new technology, with business uncertainty being the determining factor. Other results only further highlight the desire for businesses to invest, not just as a means

to navigate adverse market conditions, but also to keep pace with rival organisations. Some 63% of the sample identified ‘competitiveness’ as the main reason why they would now spend money on a new steam boiler, with rising energy bills and strain on current assets also scoring high at 53% and 52% respectively. While these results give cause for optimism in 2021, there are still a number of issues that

may impede business’s recovery. An overwhelming majority said it had become harder to find people with the necessary skills to operate and fix steam boilers since the pandemic. In addition to the skills gap, over half identified an increase in maintenance costs as another key issue. These problems appear to explain why almost 85% said they would now consider hiring equipment as a way to bridge a gap in demand and minimise the threat of an existing boiler breaking down. These findings come as Aggreko is set to launch some new steam boilers into its

European fleet. The two and five tonne models have a number of benefits, including rapid steam production from cold start, higher energy efficiency ratings and low carbon emissions. The company believes it will not only help meet a surge in demand across various end-user industries, but also help to navigate uncertainties following COVID-19 and the UK’s departure from EU in January. Graeme Cunningham has been appointed sector development manager. He said: “It’s

encouraging to see businesses willing to invest despite the difficulties experienced throughout 2020. Steam boilers form a central part of many different production processes, so it was important for Aggreko to gauge how conditions have changed and what will drive uptake of more efficient equipment in the years ahead. There are clearly concerns, particularly around supply of skilled labour and a heavier demand on existing assets, so it’s vital there are options available to mitigate these issues. We believe our two new models will bridge gaps in demand and help to stimulate economic recovery in 2021.”


Password protection facilities ensure that personal data is kept safe, but a new study reveals that many businesses are ignoring advice and leaving themselves vulnerable to cyberattacks. A study of 1,247 workplaces, by

cybersecurity experts, found that two-thirds of businesses (66%) leave themselves at risk of cyberattacks due to their lack of having (or enforcing) password rotation policies. It is advised that you should change your

password every 60-90 days, but a significant number of workers (46%) confess to ignoring this advice, leaving themselves open to risk. Of the companies that do have password

rotation policies in place, 45% of employees confess that they didn’t know these policies actually existed. A staggering 57% who did know about their

company’s password protection policies revealed they do not adhere, and of those who do adhere, 63% will simply use the same passwords on rotation. For the companies without password

rotation policies, only 7% of employees bother to regularly rotate or change their passwords. The main reasons workers cited for not

changing their passwords were: • they are worried they will forget their password (57%) • regularly changing passwords is annoying (48%) • they don’t see the point (45%) The research found that managers and C-

suite staff were more likely to not follow password rotation policies (38%), with entry- level employees not far behind (34%). David Janssen, security researcher and

founder at, said: “Password rotation is such a simple policy that both businesses and employees can put in place to safeguard and protect their work. Changing your password every 2-3 months is a really effective way to deter cyberattacks, and although yes, some may find it frustrating, it could save a lot of heartache down the line.” “It was shocking to see that so many

workers didn’t realise what the point in regularly changing their password is, and it’s clear from our research that companies and employees alike need to be educated on the importance of implementing policies such as these.”


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64