KKR-backed ContourGlobal acquires energy storage projects in Italy
The battery projects, once fully developed, will position ContourGlobal for the first Italian auction, scheduled for September, in which the country will buy storage capacity to enhance use of renewable energy.
Europe's battery storage capacity is expected to grow around five-fold by 2030, bringing with it increasing returns for energy majors, project developers and traders, as the cost of new projects falls.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Zelensky blasts NATO members' 'slow' spending increase
Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Vladimir Putin could attack a NATO country within the next five years, as he criticised the alliance for a slow spending ramp up. Speaking to Sky News about the proposed NATO spending target of 5 percent of GDP by 2035, the Ukrainian leader said: 'In my view, this is slow because we believe that starting from 2030 Putin can have significantly greater capabilities.' Zelensky said that although Putin's soldiers 'are all getting annihilated and wiped out at the battlefield' and that the Russian leader 'needs a pause', he said '10 years is a very long time. 'He will have a new army ready [by then].' Zelensky's remarks come after NATO members agreed on Sunday to a big increase in their defence spending target to 5 percent of GDP, as demanded by US President Donald Trump. The UK was among the 32 member countries to agree to the goal, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer vowing to commit Britain to spending 3.5 percent of GDP on core defence spending, plus a further 1.5 per cent on security-related domestic infrastructure. Starmer's pledge came as he welcomed Zelensky to Downing Street over the weekend ahead of the NATO summit on Tuesday. Sir Keir also announced plans for a new agreement with Ukraine. 'I'm really proud that this afternoon we are able to announce an industrial military co-production agreement, the first of its kind so far as Ukraine and the UK are concerned, which will be a massive step forward now in the contribution that we can continue to make, and is really a symbol of not only our joint work in this conflict, but the 100-year agreement that we've put in place', the prime minister said. It also comes as the Ukrainian leader and Trump are set to meet on Wednesday on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague, a senior source in the Ukrainian presidency told AFP. The war-time leader has been a central figure at recent summits but given his fractious relationship with Trump, Zelensky has not been invited to the main working session with NATO members. 'The teams are finalising the details' of the meeting, the source told AFP, adding that the talks were scheduled for the 'early afternoon' in the Netherlands. The source added that the discussion would focus on Ukraine's 'purchase of a defence package, a large part of which consists of air defence systems'. The leaders would also discuss more 'sanctions against Russia, and a price cap on oil', the source added. Ukraine and its allies have sought to lower an existing oil cap imposed on Russia after it invaded Ukraine more than three years ago, from $60 to $45, to dent the Kremlin war chest. Trump so far has frustrated Western allies by refusing to impose new sanctions on Russia despite President Vladimir Putin's refusal to agree to a Ukraine ceasefire. Trump and his NATO counterparts are due to gather today for a summit that could unite the world's biggest security organisation around a new defense spending pledge or widen divisions among the 32 allies. Last week, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was optimistic the European members and Canada would commit to invest at least as much of their economic growth on defense as the United States does for the first time. Then Spain rejected the new NATO target for each country to spend 5 percent of its gross domestic product on defense needs, calling it 'unreasonable.' Trump also insists on that figure. The alliance operates on a consensus that requires the backing of all 32 members. The following day, Trump said the U.S. should not have to respect the goal. 'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' he said. Trump lashed out at Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's government, saying: 'NATO is going to have to deal with Spain. Spain's been a very low payer.' He also criticized Canada as 'a low payer.' Spain was the lowest spender in the alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defense expenditure, while Canada was spending 1.45%, according to NATO figures. The two-day summit in The Hague involves an informal dinner Tuesday and one working session Wednesday morning. A very short summit statement has been drafted to ensure the meeting is not derailed by fights over details and wording. Founded in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed by 12 nations to counter the threat to security in Europe posed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, notably via a strong U.S. presence on the continent. NATO's ranks have grown to 32 countries since the Washington Treaty was signed 75 years ago. Sweden joined last year, worried by an increasingly aggressive Russia.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Plan to scrap two-child benefit cap ‘dead in the water' after welfare U-turn
Sir Keir Starmer will not scrap the two-child benefit cap after his U-turn on welfare cuts left a £5bn hole in Labour 's spending plans. Senior Labour figures have reportedly warned that tax hikes are on the horizon after the benefits climbdown, with a change in the controversial cap, introduced when George Osborne was chancellor, now thought to be off the table. 'My assessment is that is now dead in the water,' a No 10 source told The Sunday Times. A source close to the chancellor added: 'MPs will need to acknowledge that there is a financial cost to not approving the welfare changes, whether that's tax rises or not scrapping the two-child benefit cap. They need to understand the trade-offs.' The prospect of Labour keeping the two-child benefit cap in place will provoke fresh unrest among Labour backbenchers, who have a taste for rebellion after forcing Sir Keir's hand on cuts to the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability benefit. Sir Keir is believed to have told his cabinet he wants to scrap the two-child cap - first imposed by Osborne in 2015. Critics of the policy, which restricts parents from claiming certain benefits for more than two of their children, say it pushes children into poverty. Charities frequently cite the £3.4bn move as one of the most cost effective ways of alleviating child poverty. Asked on Thursday whether he still wanted to scrap the two-child cap, Sir Keir said: 'The last Labour government drove down child poverty and it's one of the proudest things that we did. 'Sadly, the last government allowed child poverty to go back up again. 'I'm determined that this government will drive it down, just as the last Labour government did. 'We've got a strategy and a task force working on this and will lay out the details of that. I personally don't think there's a silver bullet that if you do this one thing, it will deal with child poverty.' Pressure on the PM over the two-child benefit cap will likely increase in the run up to this autumn's Budget, in which Rachel Reeves has been warned she must raise taxes or put Labour's agenda at risk. Jim O'Neill, a former Goldman Sachs chief turned Treasury minister who quit the Conservatives and later advised Ms Reeves, said she faces no choice but to abandon key parts of her economic policy – including her commitment not to raise income tax, national insurance contributions for employees or VAT. 'Without changing some of the big taxes, welfare and pensions, they [Labour] can't commit to things like Northern Powerhouse Rail, small modular nuclear reactors, and various other things that will make an investment and growth difference,' he told The Independent.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Chelsea and Aston Villa being fined while Crystal Palace are banned would be a mockery
Like Chelsea, the sanction for Aston Villa, in the Europa League next season, also saw most of the sanction suspended. Villa, who have chafed against the Premier League financial controls, were fined €11 million for similar offences on a lesser scale. Barcelona, a club still in breach of La Liga FFP over a missing €100 million in VIP seats sales in a stadium as yet unbuilt, were given a €60 million Uefa fine with €45 million suspended. Meanwhile, Lyon visited the last-chance saloon for what felt like the fifth time in the last few months. The French club were fined €12.5 million with a further €40 million suspended. Targets have been set for Lyon's trading this coming season. Uefa has stipulated that €60 million must be injected into the club by July 15 and converted into equity within four months. L'Équipe, the French newspaper, has reported this week that the DNCG is minded to rule that Lyon must raise €100 million now and a further €100 million by the end of the season to avoid relegation. With Textor now off the board and the US investor Michele Kang the new chair of the club, that may or may not be possible. But either way, the question presents itself anew. How many chances will Lyon get? Lyon could take a Europa League place at the expense of Palace on the actions of a man who never had decisive influence at the Premier League club, and by now does not even own a chair leg at Selhurst Park. Yet if regulation exists for any reason then it is surely to stop the kind of financial collapse that seems to be unfolding at Lyon, not punish well-run clubs like Palace. Palace's principals, chairman Steve Parish and his US investors David Blitzer and Josh Harris, control the club – but not Textor. They could not force him to comply with the Uefa requirement to place his shares in a blind trust by the March deadline on the off-chance Palace would win the FA Cup. Especially not given that Textor was in the process of selling that stake. The Palace stake was held in Textor's investment vehicle Eagle Football, of which he owns 50 per cent. Which, when he still owned it, would place his personal control of Palace at less than the 30 per cent determined to constitute decisive influence. Palace now have no connection with Textor Textor never ran Palace. The two clubs shared no recruitment staff or data, much less players. Just one trade between the two clubs in all that time – the €1 million sale of Jake O'Brien to Lyon in 2024. One of the current legal cases against Textor is that brought by Bruno Lage, who managed another Eagle Football club, Botafogo. When he sacked Lage, Textor is alleged to have promised him the Palace job which he could ultimately not deliver, for reasons that should now be clear. Lage, now Benfica manager, is suing Textor in the High Court. Eagle Football has said it will vigorously defend its position and indicated it is open to settlement talks with Lage. If anything might indicate to Uefa that Textor never had decisive influence at Palace, then it might be the Lage case. Indeed, as Lyon owner he traded more with Nottingham Forest than he ever did with Palace. Forest's sale of Moussa Niakhaté last year and then the loan and sale of Orel Mangala were useful disposals for the Premier League club. The Brazilian Igor Jesus moved in the opposite direction on Saturday. Forest will inherit Palace's place in the Europa League should Uefa expel the latter. Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis also had to go through the Uefa blind trust procedure for MCO when it looked like Forest might make the Champions League as well as his Greek champions Olympiakos. As with every MCO which undertakes the process, from City Football Group, to Ineos at Manchester United, it is a legal tick-box that appeases Uefa. Does it make any difference when it comes to the reality of ownership? What is not in doubt is that as of July 6, 81 days before the first Europa League first league-stage matchday round, Palace have no connection with Textor – the former investor who never called the shots. Yet at other clubs where rules are accepted to have been broken the picture is different. Deals are being cut, fines are being suspended, targets for improvement are being set. Palace missed one arbitrary deadline – a requirement that was out of the club's control to fulfil over a supposed MCO overlap that no longer exists. Yet it is Palace who are faced with losing that European place they fought so hard to secure – while others get chance after chance.
