Table of Contents
Share this article
When a heat-related fault knocked out power to tens of thousands of homes in north-west France last week, it was easy to file the news under infrastructure: a problem for grid operators and the owners of physical assets. This instinctive response is precisely the one that investors and management teams should now be interrogating.
For most of the past decade, physical climate risk has been treated as an asset-heavy affair. Floods, fires, storms, and droughts threaten property, factories, ports, farmland, and, increasingly, data centres. Those exposures can be mapped, modelled, and possibly insured, for a price. Businesses whose principal assets walk out the door each evening – the service sector comprising consultancies, software houses, agencies, and financial and professional services firms that dominate the developed-market output – have largely regarded climate risks as someone else’s balance sheet problem. The heatwave which sat over Europe last week is a reminder that the distinction was always more comforting than real.
The current episode is not subtle and ironically almost matches the doomsday scenario predicted by the Met Office in 2020 for the year 2050. Much of western Europe is running 10–18°C above seasonal norms, as a stagnant heat dome draws Saharan air northwards. The UK has recorded its hottest June day on record; France its hottest day on any date; Spain has pushed past 43°C. The strain is already showing in hard infrastructure. Beyond the French outage, air conditioning and energy demand across Europe has been enough to trigger failures and close Florence’s Uffizi galleries, while cooling units and MRI scanners have stopped working across the UK’s National Health Service. Europe is warming at roughly twice the global average, which makes this a preview of the future operating environment rather than an aberration.
A hit to the workforce: productivity suffers
The first cost lands on the asset the people-heavy economy is built on: its workforce. Last year, the World Meteorological Organization and the World Health Organization put the loss of worker productivity at 2–3% for every degree increase above 20°C. Analysis at the corporate level from the OECD points in the same direction, finding that 10 additional days above 35°C in a year trim annual labour productivity by 0.2–0.3%, with the effect climbing more than five times when temperatures exceed 40°C.
Knowledge work enjoys no special exemption. Concentration, error rates, and the quality of decision-making all deteriorate in sustained heat, even in a cooled office. Meanwhile, the shift of the knowledge sector towards hybrid working over the last five years means that many workers now spend several weekdays working from home, with residential air conditioning a premium, if not rarity, in the majority of European homes. During periods of extreme heat, this can affect employee wellbeing, productivity, and even attendance. A professional services firm that loses a few percentage points of effective output across a fortnight of red alerts is carrying a recurring cost that rarely appears on risk registers.
“As temperatures increase, both the cognitive and physical capacity of workers decrease. At the same time, extreme temperatures can increase absenteeism due to heightened health issues and transport disruptions.” – OECD 2024
The bill arrives twice: energy costs are going up
The second cost arrives awkwardly at the same time. “Asset-light” firms are less asset-light than they suppose: they still occupy offices, lease data halls, and sign electricity contracts. Cooling expenditure scales directly with temperature, and each degree increase in outdoor temperature adds roughly 3– 5% to cooling energy use, even for the most efficient air conditioning systems. In peak conditions, air conditioning can dominate a power bill.
When temperatures sit 10–18°C above normal for days, this cost compounds. Moreover, it does so precisely when wholesale prices are spiking: Germany and France’s power market prices have reached their highest points since 2024 and 2023 respectively, driven by increased cooling demand and power plant outages. Overheads rise, in other words, just as output falls. The margin is therefore squeezed from both ends.
What this means for investors: a need for better due diligence
None of this is lost in leading large-cap PE. This month, Carlyle introduced a portfolio risk framework that builds extreme-weather exposure and its insurance consequences directly into valuation and investment decisions. The diagnosis underpinning these assessments is the instructive part. Carlyle argues that valuations tend not to reflect climate risk until after an adverse event, by which point cover has become markedly dearer. While Carlyle aims the tool at the asset-level rather than people businesses, the principle – that climate exposure is a valuation input rather than a footnote – travels to any business being bought, sold, or financed.
Climate exposure is a valuation input rather than a footnote.
The broader lesson for acquirers and boards is to stop treating physical climate risk as something that only matters to asset-heavy businesses. Heatwaves degrade productivity, inflating overheads and complicating insurability simultaneously, and it is doing so to asset-light businesses as well as asset-heavy ones. Assessing those climate risks and pricing that exposure in – before the deal, before the season, before the next red alert – is fast becoming the cost of being taken seriously. In that context, resilience is not only a risk-management concern, but also an increasingly relevant factor in shaping valuations, access to capital, and long-term competitive advantage.
Explore Sustainable Finance
Adding value into investment decision-making, raising capital, financial product design, operations, and asset ownership.
We are the world’s leading purpose driven, digitally enabled, science-based activator. And always welcome inquiries and partnerships to drive positive change together.