When the grid says no: why energy capacity is becoming a business risk

Electricity demand is rising faster than supply. Networks are struggling to cope, and for many organisations, the promise of full electrification now comes with a hidden constraint: the grid itself.

Most companies are investing in electric systems for heat, cooling, and mobility. But every site has a contractual limit on how much power it can draw from the network, known as its Maximum Import Capacity (MIC). Breaching that limit comes with penalties, and getting approval to increase it is becoming harder by the month.

This isn’t a distant challenge. It’s already happening. In many regions, requests for higher MIC are being delayed or rejected because grid capacity is simply unavailable. That means organisations electrifying too quickly — or without understanding their true demand profile — could face costly load restrictions, financial penalties, or even supply interruptions. Without proper planning, forecasting and management, your organisation is at risk.

What if millions of investment can't be supported by the grid?

Electrifying heat or cooling may look like a straightforward decarbonisation win. In reality, it often creates sharp peaks in electricity demand. A cold spell, for example, can send power use soaring beyond contractual limits. Without careful planning, the systems designed to reduce emissions can become a new source of operational and financial risk.

Where resilience begins

On-site generation often tops the list of decarbonisation efforts. But real resilience starts before implementation - it starts with understanding your demand and actively managing it. Knowing exactly how and when your organisation uses energy is the foundation for controlling exposure and planning upgrades responsibly.

Historical load data provides the baseline. Continuous monitoring adds visibility. Together, they reveal how demand shifts through the day and across seasons, and where the opportunities lie to spread or reduce peaks.

For operational leaders, this isn’t just about keeping the lights on. It’s about protecting day-to-day operations, financial stability and the capacity for growth. MIC penalties, unplanned downtime, or network restrictions can all cascade into cost, compliance, and credibility risks.

Clarity before capacity

Installing solar arrays or buying more hardware isn’t the solution. The first step is clarity: knowing what’s driving demand, where flexibility exists, and how to balance electrification with grid constraints.

With the right insight, organisations can plan their decarbonisation journey without creating new risks. Energy resilience becomes part of an organisation-wide strategy, not an afterthought.

Rethinking hot water safety in a net-zero context

In many organisations, compliance with Legionella regulations is a well-established routine: maintaining elevated water temperatures, flushing outlets regularly, and logging the activity. These measures are vital for safety, but they weren’t designed with energy or carbon efficiency in mind.

Domestic hot water systems are often significant energy users, yet their impact is frequently overlooked in broader sustainability strategies. Especially in large or complex buildings, maintaining consistently high temperatures across an entire network can come at a notable carbon cost.

A balance between risk and efficiency

Much of the current approach stems from a desire to avoid risk. Heating water above 60 °C offers reassurance that bacterial growth is being controlled. But this often results in systems running constantly, regardless of actual usage or need. In practice, that could mean heating and reheating water that’s never used, or flushing litres down the drain as part of routine checks.

It raises a question worth exploring: are all the measures in place today still necessary in every context, or are some driven more by precedent than performance?

Understanding actual demand, outlet use, and temperature trends may help reveal where adjustments are possible - without compromising safety. But doing so requires the right data and a willingness to reassess long-held assumptions.

A more integrated view

Rather than viewing compliance and carbon as competing priorities, there may be scope to align them. Tools now exist to monitor temperature patterns more closely, control systems more precisely, and target interventions where they’re most needed.

Some organisations are already starting to explore this intersection - using insight to reduce energy use while continuing to meet safety requirements. It’s not about lowering standards, but about working smarter within them.

For organisations aiming to reduce operational emissions, domestic hot water systems may offer more opportunities than previously thought. The question is no longer just how to stay compliant, but how to do so in a way that also supports broader sustainability goals.

Why energy security is now a business-critical issue

Some resources are so fundamental that without them, business comes to a standstill. Labour, capital, raw materials, and information are the obvious ones. Among those raw materials is electricity.

For decades, energy sat in the background—seen as dependable, low-risk, and almost invisible. It was treated like stationery or cleaning products: a routine cost, assumed to be unlimited and unproblematic. That mindset is shifting fast.

Because when the power cuts out, everything stops. The recent blackout at Heathrow and failures across Spain’s national grid made that reality impossible to ignore. Energy isn’t just another input—it’s the lifeblood of modern business. And when it fails, the consequences are immediate: no electricity means no business.

The hidden risk in your operations

Most business continuity plans mention electricity—but usually as a box to tick: a backup generator, maybe an untested system buried in the appendix. What’s often missing is a clear understanding of how and when you actually use electricity. Without that visibility, even minor interruptions can lead to significant disruptions.

And this isn’t just about sudden outages. Rising demand, pressure on grids, and uncertainty around renewables all contribute to a more fragile energy landscape. If electricity is a key input to your operations, as fundamental as money or people, it deserves the same strategic attention.

Energy visibility is risk resilience

You can’t control the grid, but you can control your demand. And that starts with insight. Understanding where energy is used, when it peaks, and where it’s wasted isn’t just about hitting sustainability targets—it’s about keeping your business running.

Reducing unnecessary demand strengthens resilience. It means your operations are less vulnerable to price spikes, infrastructure strain, or supply limitations. It might even mean your critical systems can run on a smaller generator if needed. If your business plans to grow, optimisation of current use means that growth is not restricted by an electrical grid connection, for example, and can be achieved with lower costs.

The businesses that do best in the face of energy volatility are those that don’t leave it to chance. They build clarity around demand, optimise what they control, and act before disruption hits.

Energy security isn’t just about supply. It’s about knowing how your business uses energy—and what happens when it’s no longer there.

Back to

Knowledge Academy

net-zero targets

The invisible embodied carbon in reaching net-zero targets

Reaching net-zero often feels like solving the wrong problem in the dark. You upgrade the obvious. You tick the boxes. But something still doesn’t add up. That “something” is usually embodied carbon—the carbon cost baked into the technologies we rely on to deliver our decarbonisation plans.

We rarely see it. But it’s there—from the steel and cement used in construction, to the materials and manufacturing processes behind solar panels and wind turbines. These tools of the energy transition carry a carbon load of their own—and it adds up fast.

The solar paradox

Take solar panels. Long-term, they help reduce operational emissions. But upfront, they demand energy-intensive mining, manufacturing, and transport—generating carbon before a single kilowatt-hour is saved. In many cases, it can take years for panels to “pay back” their carbon cost.

This doesn’t mean solar is the wrong choice. But it does mean we need to see the full picture. Real progress isn’t just about adding renewables—it’s about asking whether we’re reducing demand in the first place.

The overlooked opportunity: operational waste

The fastest way to cut emissions—and the one with the lowest carbon overhead—is improving how buildings perform right now. Most commercial assets consume more energy than they need to. That’s often due to legacy systems, poor controls, or operational drift over time. Fixing that doesn’t require carbon-intensive materials. It requires insight, prioritisation, and action.

Before you install new tech, it’s worth asking: have you addressed the avoidable waste first?

Make embodied carbon visible by reducing what you don’t need

Embodied carbon isn’t going away. It’s part of the system. But when you reduce the need for new interventions—by improving operational efficiency—you avoid generating it in the first place. That’s where the real leverage sits. Fewer upgrades. Smaller footprints. Faster impact.

Sustainability performance needs to be tracked and managed like any other business metric. With rising carbon costs and stricter reporting rules, this will soon be non-negotiable. But the upside is clear: more efficient buildings, lower emissions, better indoor conditions—and a faster path to credible net-zero outcomes.

Back to

Knowledge Academy

net-zero targets

The power of perspective: how understanding Energy Use Intensity can transform your building’s performance

You wouldn’t drive a car without watching the rev counter. Not because it tells you how far you’ve gone, but because it shows how hard the engine’s working. Energy Use Intensity (EUI) works the same way for buildings.

Energy Use Intensity shows how much energy a building uses per square metre. The lower the number, the more efficiently the space is performing. It’s a straightforward benchmark—but it’s more than a metric. It gives decision-makers a way to step back, see what’s really going on, and move forward with clarity.

A baseline that makes action easier

When you start with Energy Use Intensity, you’re not guessing. You’re measuring. That matters—especially if you're responsible for net-zero delivery or portfolio-level decarbonisation. Energy Use Intensity gives you a normalised way to compare performance across buildings, identify outliers, and set clear, credible targets.

It’s often the first piece of insight we use with clients. Why? Because it gives immediate perspective. You can see how your performance stacks up against similar buildings, what’s driving excess use, and what needs to change first. Without sensors. Without delay. Just a starting point that makes the next step obvious.

From benchmark to outcome

Once you’ve got your baseline, Energy Use Intensity becomes a guide for strategy. You can set a target Energy Use Intensity as part of your decarbonisation roadmap. Then track how each intervention, like a system upgrade or control change, affects the result. If the number doesn’t move, you’ll know it’s time to adjust. That’s how you avoid wasted investment and stay aligned with your goals.

The benefits go beyond emissions. A strong Energy Use Intensity signals operational efficiency, and that matters to tenants and investors. In a market increasingly driven by sustainability performance, buildings with low Energy Use Intensity are more attractive, more resilient, and more future-proof.

Don’t overcomplicate it

You don’t need full real-time data capture to get started. Most buildings already provide enough information to estimate a useful Energy Use Intensity. From there, you can decide what’s worth monitoring more closely—and what can wait.

With the right insight, you can make smarter energy decisions faster. Most organisations can make meaningful improvements within six months, long before any complex tech is in place.

Reporting under CSRD starts this year—here’s what that means

The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) came into force across Europe in January 2023. Globally, countries are introducing their own frameworks, with momentum building toward greater alignment across sectors, markets, and reporting standards. But it’s 2025 when the real pressure begins.

This is the first year that thousands of large companies across the EU are expected to report under the new framework, using data from 2024. For sustainability leaders, that shifts the conversation from planning to proof. It’s no longer about whether your organisation is preparing. It’s whether your portfolio is ready.

CSRD demands more than ambition. It requires clarity, structure, and verifiable insight into how your assets actually perform. And that means energy efficiency, emissions, and operational transparency are now headline issues—not backend metrics.

What UK companies need to know

Even though the UK is no longer part of the EU, the CSRD could still apply. If your company has securities listed on an EU-regulated market, or if it generates more than €150 million in EU turnover, you may fall within scope. This includes UK firms with large EU subsidiaries or branches that generate significant revenue. It’s critical to review your structure now. Reporting obligations will expand, and compliance won’t just mean better paperwork—it means disclosing meaningful, auditable sustainability data across your operations.

Early CSRD reporters are flagging around 24 material topics and 40 key impacts, risks and opportunities on average—but there’s no consistent way they’re doing it. The takeaway? If your team isn’t aligned on how to approach double materiality, you’re going to struggle to report clearly or credibly.

Not just data—disclosure with direction

CSRD doesn’t just ask for more data. It requires meaningful and auditable reporting on how your operations align with environmental, social, and governance (ESG) expectations. This includes specific disclosures on energy use, carbon emissions, climate risk, and the resilience of assets across your portfolio.

This level of transparency means moving beyond estimates and modelled projections, toward real-world performance indicators that stand up to external scrutiny. Friends of EFRAG notes that while Scope 1 and 2 emissions are widely reported with clear targets, Scope 3 remains a significant challenge, especially across supply chains. Many companies set net-zero targets without clear pathways to reach them, making performance tracking and transparency non-negotiable.

The organisations that will thrive under this directive are those who already know how their buildings perform—and who can clearly show what’s improving, what’s not, and what comes next.

The role of building performance in CSRD

Buildings are one of the biggest contributors to operational emissions. That makes them a focal point in CSRD reporting, whether you manage a portfolio of offices, retail, logistics, or mixed-use assets.

But the real challenge isn’t the emissions themselves. It’s knowing where they come from, what’s driving them, and how to bring them down—credibly, not theoretically.

That’s where operational insight becomes essential. You don’t need hundreds of sensors or new systems to get started. Often, the first indicators are already available. What’s missing is a clear line of sight between performance, targets, and action.

Don’t wait for compliance to catch you

CSRD is being phased in, but the reputational pressure is already here. Investors, regulators, and occupiers are all looking for clear evidence of environmental performance. And with carbon reporting under greater scrutiny, gaps in visibility won’t just delay compliance—they’ll erode confidence.

It’s not about racing to comply. It’s about using CSRD as a structure to validate what you already know: where performance is strong, where the friction points are, and how to prioritise action that actually delivers impact. Readiness isn’t about ticking boxes. It’s about knowing where you stand.

You don’t need to have all the answers. But you do need to be clear on how your portfolio performs today, and what needs to happen next.