NEWS UPDATE Appointments


● The new chief operating officer at POWWR is Martin Eade, who joins as an accomplished operations leader with a strong track record in building and scaling fast-growth software businesses. Over more than 20 years, he has held various senior leadership roles where he led digital transformation, global expansion, and major M&A programmes across the SaaS and technology sectors.


● The British Compressed Air Society (BCAS) has appointed Derek Leith, regional director for Northern Europe at Ingersoll Rand, as its new vice president. Working alongside president Wendy Hayward and BCAS board members, Derek will continue the progress made by the Society to recruit new talent into the compressed air industry, a growing challenge as many engineers reach the end of their careers.


● Eclipse Power has announced the appointment of Emma Ford as its new chief executive officer. With more than 20 years’ experience across the UK and European energy infrastructure sector, Emma has led major operational, cultural and commercial transformations within complex environments. Most recently, she served as vice president and head of generation at Ørsted.


● Solar thermal specialist Naked Energy has named Thomas Birr, former chief strategy and innovation officer of E.ON, as its new non- executive chairman. Thomas brings more than 30 years of experience across the energy sector, with deep expertise in corporate strategy, innovation, venture investment and international growth.


● Energy and infrastructure solutions provider, Global, has welcomed Barry Carruthers as chief strategy officer. Barry brings 15 years of experience in the energy sector, having held senior leadership roles across ScottishPower. His background spans energy portfolio development, policy influence and clean energy investments.


● Güntner Group, a global leader in heat exchange technology, has appointed Yan Evans as managing director, global data centre business. A chartered engineer, Yan joins from FläktGroup, where he led global data centre operations from 2018-2025. In his new role, Yan will oversee data centre activities across the Güntner and JAEGGI brands worldwide for the group.


08


For all the latest news stories visit www.eibi.co.uk


Servers ranked highest, costing between £30.69 and £34.21 annually per device depending on company size. Routers also featured in the top ten, costing between £1.15 and £1.28 to run individually based on business size. Despite businesses largely shifting towards digital


workflows, laser printers could add between £17.71 and £19.73 per device per year. When scaled across an entire office, everyday equipment


ENERGY COSTS


Office servers the biggest contributor to workplace energy costs


Office energy bills are being pushed higher by power-hungry devices such as servers and laser printers, alongside employee habits like leaving equipment switched on, according to new analysis by the comparison site Uswitch. The research comes as more than a quarter of UK businesses (27%) say they currently find it difficult to pay their energy bills, while over half (52%) report utility costs as a price pressure on their business. Uswitch analysed the power consumption of common


office equipment against standard working patterns to estimate annual running costs across different business sizes.


can measurably increase energy costs. Microbusinesses could spend nearly £20 per desktop computer each year, with costs slightly lower for small and medium businesses at £18.64 and £17.63, respectively. This does not include monitors, which can add at least an additional £1 per device annually. While these figures may seem minor in isolation, they quickly add up across larger teams using multiple devices. However, it’s not just equipment driving costs; employee


behaviour also plays a significant role. A survey of 1,000 office workers shows that one in five employees (21%) admit they don’t worry about leaving devices on in the office as they are not responsible for the bills, despite more than half (52%) recognising the associated environmental and financial costs for employers.


The findings suggest businesses could minimise costs


through simple behavioural changes, because over one in five (22%) rarely or never turn their monitor off when away from their desks for extended periods. 21% rarely or never set their computer to sleep after short periods of inactivity, and only a third (33%) adjust their brightness settings to reduce energy consumption.


Energy-efficiency investment trust calls it a day


The UK’s largest investment trust focused on energy-efficiency measures is to be wound down, returning its capital to shareholders. SDCL Efficiency Income Trust plc (SEIT) had been the first listed company of its kind to invest exclusively in the energy-efficiency sector. SEIT invested in projects that provided decentralised on-site generation of power and heat, together with projects that reduced energy demand. Established in 2017, the firm specialised in developing and


investing in energy-efficiency and decentralised energy generation projects in the UK, Europe, North America and Asia. The company’s objective was “to


generate an attractive total return for investors comprising stable dividend income and capital preservation, with the opportunity for capital growth. It delivers this to shareholders through its investment in a diversified portfolio of energy-efficiency projects that deliver lower cost, cleaner and more reliable energy solutions to end users of energy”.


Chair Tony Roper comments: “Since


the material increase to interest rates in late 2022, the macro environment and investment trust landscape has become increasingly challenging. It has become clear to the board that SEIT can no longer deliver returns that are acceptable to shareholders in its current structure. The status quo is not viable.” The investment company relied


entirely upon consultants and contractors. According to its 2025 annual report, it had no direct employees.


European Union deliberates over carbon credits


A group of influential cross-party European Parliament lawmakers have urged the European Commission not to include international carbon credits within the EU’s emissions trading system (EU:ETS). This plea comes as part of a high-


stakes debate over how the EU will meet its ambitious 2040 climate goal of a 90% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The core of the dispute involves the potential use of any external offsets to meet internal climate targets: an option excluded in all existing carbon targets, as well as in both the EU:ETS and its UK equivalent (the UK:ETS). However, under the amended


European Climate Law that came into force in April 2026, up to 5% of the


90% emissions reduction target for 2040 will for the first time be able to be met through high-quality international carbon credits. The MEPs argue that allowing


such credits within the EU:ETS would weaken the carbon price signal, reduce incentives for European industrial decarbonisation, and potentially undermine the bloc’s climate credibility. National governments are split on


the issue; Austria and Poland have expressed support for integrating these credits to manage costs, while Germany, France, the Netherlands and Finland remain firmly opposed. While some industry groups have lobbied for the use of external credits to help manage high energy costs and maintain competitiveness, many environmental think tanks and NGOs have joined the MEPs in warning against an over-reliance on removals and offsets. The UK government is escalating plans


to align the UK:ETS more closely with the European system. This follows a similar pattern with the previously independent Swiss ETS. As of now, there is no suggestion that any new arrangements for offsets will be permitted for participants in the UK system.


EIBI | MAY 2026


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