The most expensive energy project is the one you never needed

When people talk about expensive energy projects, they usually mean the ones that ran over budget, or the ones that didn’t deliver the savings promised on the slide deck.

There’s a bigger cost that almost never gets discussed: the infrastructure that should never have been built at all.

The mistake happens long before anyone signs a contract

Right across Europe, organisations are pouring millions into bigger electrical connections, oversized heat pumps, extra plant, and energy upgrades because they believe their buildings need it.

Often, they don’t.

It usually starts innocently enough. A historic design calculation here. A consultant’s estimate there. A generic demand profile borrowed from a similar building. A few gaps in the operational data, filled in with best guesses.

None of these decisions feel reckless in the moment. Each one looks reasonable on its own. Stack them together, though, and you get a business case that sails through the boardroom — built almost entirely on assumption.

By the time anyone finds out, the money is already spent

It’s usually much later that the real operational demand turns out to be a fraction of what was planned for. By then, the capital is already committed. There’s no getting it back.

This is exactly why better technology was never going to fix this. Better evidence is what fixes it.

Measure first. Invest second.

At Dublin Airport, actual operational measurements showed demand was significantly lower than the figures used during planning. That single piece of evidence changed the infrastructure specification before any money was committed, and avoided capital expenditure the organisation never needed to spend.

The cheapest project isn’t always the smartest investment.

Sometimes the smartest investment is the project you never have to build.

Why real efficiency starts with demand, not supply

Most organisations still focus on supply: how much energy comes in, what renewables are added, or which generation technologies are installed. Yet few truly understand how much energy is really needed. Without knowing how energy is used or how much is being wasted, there’s no foundation for real efficiency or credible progress.

The unseen half of performance

It starts small. Someone’s too cold, so facilities tweak a setting. Someone else feels a draft, so a louvre gets adjusted. Then a floor is reconfigured, and suddenly comfort complaints are cropping up far too often. The system drifts from its original setup. Energy use climbs, comfort falls, and no one knows why.

If you don’t have good data on how systems are performing, you can’t tell what’s efficient and what’s being wasted. It’s like managing a manufacturing business, buying raw materials without understanding how much material is actually needed to manufacture your products, and without any idea of the impact that waste has on the cost of producing these products.

Designing for the past

This lack of insight doesn’t just cause day-to-day waste. It also affects long-term decisions. When it’s time to replace equipment, new systems are often sized using old data. Many are 50 to 100 percent too big, and when they’re replaced “like for like,” that waste is built in for years to come.

The result is easy to see — higher costs, lower performance, and missed opportunities to improve.

Turning demand into intelligence

Efficiency starts with understanding demand. When you know how energy is used and where it’s wasted, you can make better choices. You can tune systems, target upgrades, and invest based on facts instead of assumptions.

Real progress doesn’t come from adding more supply. It begins with recognising what’s already happening — and using that insight to maintain control.

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

waste

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.

Back to

Knowledge Academy

waste

Why decarbonisation strategy fails without energy insight

A recent Masterclass with OPNBuildings, HaysMac and Crystal Associates explored why many sustainability strategies fall short. The discussion highlighted a consistent pattern: leaders focus on carbon targets without understanding the energy systems that need to support them. Because when energy is ignored, every decarbonisation plan stands on weak foundations.

Why decarbonisation efforts fail

Many organisations treat carbon as the outcome. This creates the false impression that carbon reduction is the primary goal. Carbon is only a measure: sustainability depends on understanding how energy is used and where it is lost. Companies often assume unlimited capacity or rely on offsets rather than improving performance. This widens the credibility gap around net-zero commitments.

Decarbonisation fails when energy is not measured, tracked, or managed accurately. Leaders struggle to predict future demand. And this only makes sense: working with spreadsheets and fragmented information, it’s easy to overlook inefficiencies. Without the right insights, it’s easy to miss early signs that systems are not performing as expected. This leads to ambitious plans built on uncertain ground. Money is wasted. Capacity is strained. Strategy becomes noise rather than impact.

Treat energy as a necessary input

A stronger approach begins with treating energy as a critical input. Organisations need clear scenario planning: the ability to map goals, constraints, and baselines in one place. A structured way to review progress and adapt.

The message is clear. Stop wasting energy. Build sustainability on real insight and real performance. Understand demand, capacity, and efficiency. Only then can sustainability plans become credible, deliverable, and financially sound.

The risk no one’s managing: why energy risk management is now a business priority

Every well-run organisation understands the importance of risk management. Identifying, avoiding, and mitigating risk is second nature in finance, operations, and governance. Yet when it comes to energy, that discipline often disappears.

For decades, energy was treated as a relatively stable cost and a guaranteed resource. Prices rarely moved enough to matter, and supply was assumed to be secure. So few organisations built the same level of systems or scrutiny around energy that they did around financial or operational risk.

That complacency is now becoming a liability. Who’s managing the risk connected to the energy that keeps your operations going?

A new landscape of risk

Energy risk today looks nothing like it did a generation ago. The shift from fossil fuels to electrification has created new dependencies — and new vulnerabilities.

Oil and gas once offered security of supply. Now, as demand for low-carbon electricity accelerates, networks are struggling to keep up. Utilities are imposing caps on the amount of power they can guarantee, and access to electricity — once taken for granted — is no longer guaranteed.

It’s easy to say, “Let’s use energy more efficiently.” But that’s impossible without the right structures, frameworks, and insight into how energy is actually used. Without accurate data or reliable reporting, efficiency slips quietly. Equipment drifts from design performance. Processes waste energy unseen. What starts small becomes costly — unnecessary spending, wasted capacity, and growing exposure to energy volatility.

And that brings us back to the real issue: risk. When supply is limited, waste isn’t just inefficient. It’s unsustainable.

Managing energy as a core business risk

Energy can no longer be excluded from the risk framework. Understanding where it comes from, how it’s used, and how it might be managed is fundamental to operational continuity.

And managing energy starts with visibility. Reliable data systems, clear forecasting, and regular reporting are the foundation of control. When organisations treat energy with the same rigour as finance — structured systems, auditable data, and forward-looking planning — they not only reduce waste but build resilience.

Because if something is essential to keeping your business running, it deserves to be managed like every other critical risk.