CPP Investments, IKAV, Aera Energy and How the World Really Works

IKAV has diversified assets across these categories:

Asset Categories

• Solar, CSP and PV
• Geothermal
• Wind
• Gas peaker
• Conventional Energy
• Energy Efficiency, PACE

Solar

IKAV initiated its solar energy investments in Italy and Spain in 2001. We have since grown our presence in each market and expanded to France through strategic acquisitions within the operations and maintenance sector. Our local market teams employ a robust understanding of technical conditions on both current and potential investments and continuously pursue and evaluate new opportunities.

A focus for IKAV in Spain is the identification, selection and acquisition of secondary solar assets. We conduct operation and maintenance on more than 400 installations and over 200 MW, with a further 300 MW under development in green field PV projects.

In Italy, ecoprime provides operations and maintenance services covering over 90 plants for an installed capacity of 230 MWp.

• PV

Since 2019 ecoprime has operated a 75,6 MW  photovoltaic plant at Partanna – including managing the adaptation of an existing HV/MV Substation. A second plant at Mantova (MN): which produces 7.440 kWp is also currently managed by ecoprime.

• CSP

In June 2021 ecoprime took over commercial operations of Concentrated Solar Power plant also at Partanna. In December 2021 operations expanded further to include a CSP plant in Trapani (TP) producing 4,0 MW.

Geothermal

IKAV currently hold two geothermal assets in Germany at Landau and Taufkirchen. Landau consists of two main wells with a combined electrical capacity of 3.5 MWel. The Taufkirchen plant provides district heat, specifically 120l at 132oC. Development on an ORC plant for electricity is ongoing.

Two further plants have been secured by IKAV with 6 wells and 4 wells identified respectively ensuring the continued expansion of this energy source.

Wind

IKAV has been developing, constructing, and operating wind projects in Italy since 2017. Our local presence and network has been instrumental in building a high quality portfolio of wind projects that benefit from feed in tariffs. We continue to broaden our energy investment portfolio to include wind energy assets across the OECD.

Gas Peaker

In 2021 IKAV took a majority share in Metaenergia, an Italian electricity provider. IKAV´s investment financed the construction of 9 gas peakers with an overall production capacity of 505 MW. These peaker plants are the most modern in their category and emit the lowest carbon emissions. They were built on brown field sites and are responsible for stabilizing the grid.

The intermittent nature of renewable power compromises the overall stability of the electricity grid. Gas peakers are currently the most efficient, complementary technology to stabilize the electricity grid, making them key to enabling the energy transition.

Conventional Energy

In 2020 IKAV completed the acquisition of BP´s natural gas assets in the San Juan Basin. Through cost savings IKAV delivers reliable returns to investors. IKAVs plans to progress the energy transition by reducing Level 1 and 2 emissions over a 15 year period while building-out a solar power plant on the considerable land available across the asset. 

Energy Efficiency

Commercial PACE is a financing product that allows USA property owners fund energy performance improvements to privately owned buildings while significantly reducing a building’s weighted average cost of capital. IKAV Pace provides the finance to retrofit existing buildings and improve energy efficiency across lighting and controls, HVAC & chillers, boilers, windows, insulation, façade and weatherproofing roofing.

This is quite an extraordinary company with deep expertise and competencies:

As a vertically integrated asset manager IKAV incorporates affiliate companies, ecoprime and emprime. Both entities provide operational and technical expertise to the group’s assets. Founded in 2011, ecoprime provides technical, operation and maintenance and asset management services for more than 500 MW across 200 assets in Europe. In 2013, ecoprime acquired global market leader BP Solar Italy S.r.l.as well as BP Solar’s Spanish core team for technical operations.

The company has offices in Germany, Italy, Spain and France. emprime, an indirect subsidiary of ecoprime, provides numerous energy management activities across a range of energy assets. Emprime is the energy trading services company.

 

In 2019, IKAVs US counterpart IKAV Energy acquired BP American Production Co.'s natural gas assets. The group focuses on the delivery of sustainable returns through operational excellence while implementing a decarbonisation strategy and a renewable energy build-out in line with Net Zero 2030.

 

Further strategic acquisitions and corporate entities include Italy-based Ecotec, which was founded in 2018 with a focus on renewable energy development and energy efficiency projects.

I think the key here is IKAV's investment philosophy which matches perfectly with CPP Investments' sustainable investing philosophy and values:

IKAV´s investment philosophy and process is rooted in a deep responsibility to our investors as well as a clear vision to effect positive change in the world. Our goal is to ensure that energy is sustainable and available to everyone as a key step in reducing world-wide poverty. To this end IKAV prioritizes environmental, social and governance issues while consistently delivering on and above the return targets of our investors.

You can read IKAV's ESG policy here. Below, I note the group's responsible investing approach:

IKAV Group is a fully integrated asset manager with the goal to secure the energy supply of today, while taking the steps to transform the energy supply of tomorrow. Our purpose as an organization is to ensure the energy transition happens in a way and timeframe which ensures that communities benefit from low energy costs. Low energy costs allow for the creation of wealth and education and therefore the reduction of poverty. In particular, wealthy societies allow for innovation and solutions which benefit citizens worldwide and ultimately secure a sustainable path for our planet. These goals ensure we are aligned with all our stakeholders, in particular our investors and our employees and make us good citizens within our communities.

It is IKAV’s belief that a long-term sustainable path depends on a general wealth creation and hence sustainability goes beyond a ticking the box exercise and is deeply rooted in our investment philosophy. It means actively engaging with our stakeholders and acting on behalf of them with their interests in mind. IKAV holds a fiduciary responsibility to investors and shareholders while at the same time taking care to provide a fulfilling and safe working environment for our employees.

We have adopted a prudent approach based on stringent risk management. Our investments are directed towards a long-term buy and hold strategy, yielding solid long-term returns. This is reflected in the asset classes we invest in.

Again, this is exactly how CPP Investments views energy transition, a long-term process which should create wealth and it means engagement rather than divestment with companies across the traditional and renewable energy spectrum.

This investment in Aera Energy is an investment in conventional energy where IKAV has experience:

In 2020 IKAV completed the acquisition of BP´s natural gas assets in the San Juan Basin. Through cost savings IKAV delivers reliable returns to investors. IKAVs plans to progress the energy transition by reducing Level 1 and 2 emissions over a 15 year period while building-out a solar power plant on the considerable land available across the asset.

I am sharing all this because most uninformed critics will criticize CPP Investments, Canada's largest and most important pension fund, for investing in the second-largest oil and gas producer in California.

These critics simply do not understand the long-term, non-linear energy transition strategy at play here. 

I am specifically referring to the Shift people here who wrote this back in February criticizing CPP's net-zero by 2050 commitment:

CPP Investments (CPP) has taken an important step today in recognizing that the long-term success of our national retirement fund is directly linked to addressing the climate crisis.

While Shift is relieved to see the CPP finally catch up with its peers in making this essential net-zero commitment, the fund does not yet have a credible plan for achieving it. 

The CPP’s announcement today and its existing climate strategy fail to recognize the obvious reality that not every company or sector has a credible or profitable pathway to achieving zero emissions in line with the urgency of the Paris climate agreement. In particular, the CPP is heavily exposed to the fossil fuel sector, reporting that 3.53% of its portfolio, or over $17 billion, was invested in hydrocarbon-dependent assets as of March 31, 2021.   

Making ‘active investments’ and engaging with high-carbon companies to make a rapid transition can absolutely be an effective strategy for achieving climate goals and protecting pension wealth in specific circumstances. We expect pension funds to have a robust engagement programme. However, many companies, in particular those based on the production and transportation of coal, gas and oil, do not have viable or profitable pathways to zero emissions and are exposing the retirement savings of Canadians to unacceptable levels of climate-related financial risk. Investment managers must be prepared to divest from companies that do not respond to engagement or expose the fund to undue financial risk.

The question of the CPP holding onto high-risk fossil fuel assets is not a political one. Pension managers have a legal fiduciary responsibility to invest in the best long-term interests of their beneficiaries. The best interests of Canadians are not served by holding or making new investments in assets that face rapid, structural, and inevitable decline from growing climate-related transition risks. They’re also not served by investing in companies that are expanding fossil fuel production while lobbying to block, delay and weaken critical and ambitious government climate policy. Continuing to hold these assets in the long-term is not in the best interest of the CPP’s beneficiaries.

Using Canada’s national pension savings to finance growth in the production of oil, gas and coal also undermines our ability to achieve domestic and global climate targets. The CPP has repeatedly failed to acknowledge this reality in its climate policies, and continues to hold a number of assets which greenwash their actions and are taking us further from Canadian and international climate goals. 

For example, the CPP frequently touts its ownership of Wolf Midstream, which operates the Access Pipeline System and Alberta Carbon Trunk Line (ACTL), as a carbon capture and sequestration company focused on reducing emissions. The CPP neglects to mention that $2.3 billion of its total investment in Wolf went to the transportation of bitumen and diluent to oil storage facilities, while the majority of the carbon transported by the ACTL is delivered to enhanced oil recovery projects, thereby increasing oil production and emissions. Similarly, the CPP owns a 26% stake in Civitas Resources, the largest producer of oil and gas in Colorado. Civitas says it is Colorado’s ‘first carbon-neutral oil and gas producer’, a false claim that covers only Scope 1 and 2 emissions and relies on carbon offsets. Civitas refused to disclose the origin of its offsets and explicitly said it should not be responsible for Scope 3 emissions.       

The CPP’s commitment to increasing its holdings of ‘green and transition assets’ to $130 billion by 2030 is the right move, but its definition of ‘transition assets’ is not clear enough and the pension fund’s track record of conflating ‘transition assets’ with credible climate solutions is troubling. The CPP’s apparent belief that it can eliminate Scope 3 emissions from its oil, gas and coal assets is a fantasy. These examples show that the CPP either fundamentally lacks the required expertise to protect our national retirement fund from growing climate risks, or is complicit in the greenwashing of its high-carbon investments. Achieving this commitment will require a credible and transparent transition investment framework with clear interim emissions targets and an escalatory approach to engagement with high-carbon companies.

For further information about the CPP’s approach to managing climate risk and an inventory of its investments in climate solutions and fossil fuels, please see this briefing note.

Wow! Did you catch that last part: "The CPP’s apparent belief that it can eliminate Scope 3 emissions from its oil, gas and coal assets is a fantasy. These examples show that the CPP either fundamentally lacks the required expertise to protect our national retirement fund from growing climate risks, or is complicit in the greenwashing of its high-carbon investments."

My sciatica is killing me, I can barely sit, stand or walk, will likely go to the hospital tomorrow so let me try to refrain from being too nasty because I already have Canada's "Pension Elites" on edge with some of my recent critical posts (I stand by everything I stated and will not retract or apologize to anyone, ever, there's much more to come!!).

Let me just state that Shift has an agenda, a very silly and narrow-minded one that everyone should follow CDPQ and some other global pension funds and divest out of oil & gas because "eliminating Scope 3 emissions from their oil, gas and coal assets is a fantasy."

Do you want to know what's another fantasy? That the world can shift to renewables in a few years, that we can all be driving Teslas by 2030 and that we will not need oil & gas for the next century!!

This is what leftist environmental anarchists would like you to believe and it's pure and utter bullshit!! (if everyone n Canada was driving EVs now, we would have widespread power outages as our girds would collapse)

"Bullshit is the glue that binds us as a nation", remember those famous words from George Carlin, he was a lot more than a comedian, he had a way of cutting through all the right-wing and left-wing BS and exposing them for what they are.

This is why I can't stand all the ESG "kumbaya" bullshit as well as all the "diversity, equity and inclusion" bullshit out there.

Mark my words, I'm going to write a really nasty post on the BS going on in DE&I now that we finished Black History Month and entered Women's History Month.

And I'm not a racist or misogynist, far from it, think of me as an unrelenting beast that exposes the bullshit that bonds all nations, including Canada's powerful pension nations ("It's a Big Club, you and I aren't part of the BIG CLUB!!).

I'm fed up with people who should know better emailing me veiled threats, accusing me of “journalistic standards” (ie. making them look bad), but that's a post for another time, let me focus on Shift and their BS and stupid agenda to have all of Canada's pension funds divest out of oil & gas.

As John Graham, Deb Orida, Jo Taylor, Evan Siddall, Gordon Fyfe and other Canadian pension fund CEOs have rightly noted, divestment doesn't work, it's not a strategic way of thinking about energy transition which requires a long-term strategy and engagement with the oil & gas industry.

Go read my previous comment on why AIMCo's CEO Evan Siddall clearly explained why fossil fuel divestment not on the agenda for AIMCo.

Divestment is so stupid on so many levels, not to mention it transfers the risk onto other private funds that are only focused on profits and returns, with no consideration whatsoever about ESG.

What about CDPQ's 2021 climate strategy and how they decided to divest out of oil & gas last year?

And, so what? Just because CDPQ is jumping off the ESG bridge, it doesn't mean they are right and that's the only strategy that works .

In fact, some of their clients can rightly wonder whether this decision was too hasty, a bit like their decision to jump into the crypto space.

As I've stated many times, CDPQ is a global leader in sustainable investing but it has nothing to do with their fourth pillar out of oil & gas last year.

I even heard that a lot of senior portfolio managers inside CDPQ were really pissed about that decision and they were absolutely right because oil & gas delivered strong returns last year. However, it didn't impact CDPQ's Public Equities performance because they went light on tech shares last year where CDPQ lost 5.6%:

In this extremely demanding environment, the Equity Markets portfolio’s return was -11.3%, just above its benchmark index’s -11.4%, despite the exit from oil production and the exclusion of the tobacco industry, which are among the only sectors to have generated strongly positive results during the year. Among the positive factors, we note the portfolio’s focus on the quality of company fundamentals, with a favourable positioning in more defensive segments such as insurance, pharmaceuticals and telecommunications, as well as dynamic portfolio management during the year. In contrast, growth and emerging market stocks had a more challenging year. The 2022 performance influenced the five-year annualized return, which stood at 5.3%, below the benchmark index’s 6.0%. The difference is due in part to the portfolio’s low exposure to certain technology giants in the first half of the five-year period, when their stocks soared.

Still, the world will be relying on oil & gas for at least another century, this is a fact!

Last April, The Conversation posted an excellent article expressing the views of three expert climate scientists discussing why the concept of net zero is a dangerous trap. This is a phenomenal article which you should all take the time to read here.

In the summer, Don Wright posted a comment for the Energy Future Forum where he asked a simple question: Do We Really Want to Make Canadians Poorer?:

While Canada must shoulder its fair share of the burden of the global need to decarbonize, it is important we do so with a full understanding of the repercussions of different policy choices.

This is important for two reasons. First, properly costing the various options to decarbonize should inform which routes to pursue – presumably those that minimize overall costs and disruptions while reducing GHG emissions. Second, if public support for decarbonization is to be maintained over the multiple decades during which a grand decarbonization project will unfold, it is essential governments are as candid as possible about the impacts this will entail.

With respect to this second point, there is a risk of overpromising and underdelivering when so much of the public discourse tends to talk about decarbonization as an opportunity and not as an obligation.^[1] If Canadians come to feel they were sold a Pollyannish view of what decarbonization will entail, it is highly likely, when financial and transitional costs become apparent, that trust in government will further erode and support for climate action, which is currently very strong, will be vulnerable to a significant collapse.

In this paper, I will address the argument that Canada could sunset its oil and gas industry without sustaining significant economic and social costs. My conclusion is that this argument is very wrong – that the costs to Canada would be significant, and that a strategy of aggressive decarbonization over an accelerated phase out of fossil fuels, as put forward in Public Policy Forum’s “Leadership Blueprint for Canada’s Net-Energy Transition” is superior.

I will let you read the rest here.

I also think everyone thinking about climate change needs to read this excellent and rare interview with Vaclav Smil, economist and professor emeritus at Canada’s University of Manitoba who says rapid decarbonization is a fantasy:

Vaclav Smil rarely agrees to interviews. Too many in the media have portrayed him as a tool of Big Oil, he says — because he insists on pointing out how deeply dependent humanity is on fossil fuels and how difficult it will be to give them up.

The economist and professor emeritus at Canada’s University of Manitoba heats his house with solar energy. He’s no global warming denier. He recognizes the need to move away from plastics, but asks readers to note how often they touch plastic every day and ask themselves how rapid they think the switch can be.

His mission: lay out facts. “I’m not an optimist or a pessimist,” he likes to say. “I’m a scientist.”

Smil, 79, has spent a lifetime studying the history of energy — from wood to coal to oil to gas and nuclear to wind and solar — and has written dozens of deeply researched books.

He’s highly regarded and frequently cited in academic circles and counts Bill Gates among his most famous fans.

Smil recently switched to a new publisher, and his two latest books, “Numbers Don’t Lie” and “How the World Really Works,” were written and edited to be more accessible to a wider readership.

The Times interviewed Smil via email. Following are excerpts, lightly edited for length and clarity.

Much of the climate debate, you write, is dominated by catastrophists who are certain humanity finds itself on the eve of destruction, and utopians who fervently believe that technology will save the human race. How should the rest of us think about real solutions to serious energy and environmental problems?

Nothing can be more counterproductive than any certainty regarding complex affairs.

Uncertainty and unpredictability will always remain the most fundamental attributes of human existence.

In managing our energy affairs we should constantly favor doable steps: not wasting 40% of our food grown with high energy expense, not to heat or cool the universe in poorly designed but oversize houses, not to waste fuel and materials driving SUVs (nearly two tons of mass to move, usually, a single body), not to design cities that demand lengthy commutes, not to keep amassing rarely used products, not to travel mindlessly.

Instead we continue, and expand, our wasteful ways while trying to come up with miraculous — and in the near-term most unlikely — solutions, everything from running on hydrogen to controlled fusion. Good luck with that.

Many people and policymakers seem to think with enough money and willpower, we can rapidly switch to renewable energy. You believe this is a delusion, and the transformation will take decades.

It’s not a matter of belief. What is decisive is the size of the global energy system, its economic and infrastructural inertia.

Fossil fuels now supply about 83% of the world’s commercial energy, compared to 86% in the year 2000. The new renewables (wind and solar) now provide (after some two decades of development) still less than 6% of the world’s primary energy, still less than hydroelectricity.

What are the chances that after going from 86% to 83% during the first two decades of the 21st century the world will go from 83% to zero during the next two decades? Especially as a few weeks ago China announced additional 300 million tons of new coal production for 2022, and India additional 400 million tons by the end of 2023. We are still running into fossil fuels, not away from them.

You drive a Honda Civic with a small, efficient engine. While not opposed to electric vehicles, you take issue with those who buy them thinking they’re doing their part to solve global warming, mission accomplished.

There are no EVs. They are battery vehicles reflecting the electricity’s origins. If I were to buy an EV in Manitoba, it would be a 100% hydroelectricity, truly zero carbon energy, car. In North China it is a 90% coal car, in France it is a 70% nuclear car, in Russia mostly a natural gas car and in Denmark a 50% wind car et cetera.

But that is only as far as the direct energies go. Indirect energies going into the production of steel, plastics, glass and batteries are still mostly fossil fuels, because the world’s primary energy use is now still 83% dependent on fossil carbon. The notion that any EV is a zero-carbon car is nonsense.

“How the World Works” goes into what you call the Four Pillars of Modern Civilization: ammonia, plastics, steel and concrete. It seems most people think of only electricity generation and transportation in relation to fossil fuels and climate change.

You are quite right, most people think of decarbonization as just an electricity problem. They do not realize the amount of energy used directly, as fuels and electricity, and indirectly as feedstocks to make materials that define modern civilization.

Without modern nitrogen fertilizers we could feed only about half of today’s humanity. They start with ammonia, and ammonia synthesis is based mostly on natural gas. No material is made in larger quantity than cement, the key ingredient of concrete, the ubiquitous construction material. Steel comes second and iron smelting needs coke made from coal. Synthesis of plastics needs natural gas and oil as feedstocks and fuel.

Making just these four materials requires nearly 20% of the world’s total energy supply generating about 25% of all greenhouse gas emissions. Alternative, non-carbon, ways of making these materials are known — but none is available for immediate large-scale commercial deployment. Decarbonizing this massive demand cannot be done in a matter of years.

Some might agree with your conclusions and then become hopeless about humanity’s ability to address climate change in any meaningful way. What would you say to them?

Old Romans knew it well: Where difficult matters are at stake, the change is best affected by slow but relentless progress.

Evolutions are always preferable to revolutions and gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed saepe cadendo. [The drop of water hollows out the stone by frequent falling.] We should persevere in doing many small things, and eventually they add up.

But so far, we are not even seriously trying — see the ascent of SUVs, the pervasiveness of excessive flying, and food supermarkets that now average 40,000 items. That all requires plenty of carbon.

We should all listen carefully to Vaclav Smil, he understands how the world really works!

I realize this may not fit into Shift's divestment agenda or even on the Maple Eight's and Paris Accord's agenda of achieving net-zero by 2050 (good luck), but this is the real brutal truth.

Anyway, let me wrap it up here with some other CPP Investment items.

Indira Vergis of Asian Investor reports CPP Investments beefs up climate risk guidelines for boards.

Take the time to read this article here to discover what Richard Manley and his team are doing to beef up climate risk guidelines.

Lastly, CPP investments recently announced senior executive appointments:

Toronto, ON (February 21, 2023) – John Graham, President & CEO, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPP Investments), announced today two senior executive leadership appointments.

Maximilian Biagosch is appointed Senior Managing Director & Global Head of Real Assets. He will also continue to be Head of Europe and remains a member of the organization’s senior management team. Biagosch joined CPP Investments in 2015 and was most recently Senior Managing Director, Head of Europe & Direct Private Equity. Prior to this, he held senior roles at Permira Advisers LLP, and was an investment banker at Deutsche Bank and BNP Paribas in London. Biagosch holds a Master of Laws (LLM) from Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Munich and serves on the boards of Petco and BAI Communications.

Jon Webster is appointed Senior Managing Director & Chief Operating Officer (COO), joining the senior management team, where he will be responsible for the organization’s technology, data, investment operations, security and corporate services functions. Webster will join CPP Investments from Boston Consulting Group, where he is a Managing Director and Partner and a member of the Financial Institutions and Technology Advantage practices, specializing in digital and technology-enabled transformations. Webster holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Mathematics and a Ph.D., Mathematics from Loughborough University in the UK.

“These appointments position us well to continue building long-term value for the CPP Fund. We have valued Max’s experience, strong leadership and demonstrated performance on CPP Investments’ senior management team – all attributes that position him well to lead our global Real Assets program. In addition, Jon’s successful track record in operations and technology-enabled transformation with financial organizations makes him ideally suited to both take on the role of COO and contribute important insights to the organization,” said John Graham, President & CEO.

I was a bit surprised that Scott Lawrence, Managing Director and Head of Infrastructure wasn't appointed as Senior Managing Director & Global Head of Real Assets.

Very surprised actuallybecause I thought Scott was a shoo-in for this nomination (he is awesome). 

Maximilian Biagosch was most recently Senior Managing Director, Head of Europe & Direct Private Equity. Going from there to head up Real Assets isn't exactly a natural transition but I heard great things about him and they are obviously grooming him for the top job.

If you look at CPP Investments'global leadership team, there are many people who can succeed John Graham (both men and women) when he decides to hang up his skates for good.

There is a lot of top talent at Canada's top pension fund which is why others always try to snatch it away. 

Lastly, I saw on LinkedIn that Emily Tse has been appointed to the International Valuation Standards Council’s Business Valuation Board and that Hafiz Lalani has been appointed the new Head of Direct Private Equity, based in London. Congratulations to both of them.

Below, current climate efforts are not progressing quickly enough to prevent the world from overshooting the global emissions targets set in the Paris Agreement. Attention is turning increasingly to options for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere – ‘carbon dioxide removal’ (CDR). Alongside afforestation and reforestation, the main option under discussion is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS).

This is a process through which the carbon emissions from burning biomass for energy are captured before they are released into the atmosphere and stored in underground reservoirs. However, in reality, BECCS can have many drawbacks, as this animation outlines.

Also, this film shows you the central shocking secrets about the global climate crisis - but also solutions we already have to avoid disaster. Everyone wants a better, brighter future, and through smart storytelling, this film opens up the climate emergency for all to take effective actions.

Producers Paul Maple and Dr. James Dyke have brought together world leading experts and change makers from across the UK to explain simply this epic story and inspire hope. From climate facts and basic assumptions, to upgrading our political and economics systems, and enhancing our cities and communities. The Race is On offers understanding, ideas and motivation - be part of it.

Lastly, discover the challenges and the future of energy with Vaclav Smil, one of today's most influential scientists and Bill Gates' go-to author. In this event, moderated by Frances Stead Sellers, Senior Writer for the Washington Post and leader of the Future Trends Forum, they discuss the complexity of the global energy system, with a special focus on Europe's recent energy challenges.