Economy

This article is an on-site version of our Britain after Brexit newsletter. Sign up here to get the newsletter sent straight to your inbox every weekGood afternoon. Another busy week in Brexitland, a world that I often describe through the incremental irritations faced by industry and investors as a consequence of Brexit and leaving the EU single market.There were fresh examples of that this week, but actually for once the big Brexit news was non-granular: a big-picture pitch for a deeper EU-UK relationship from the shadow foreign secretary David Lammy at last weekend’s Munich Security Conference.We’ve long known that Labour, if elected, wants a security pact with the EU (something that Theresa May originally envisaged, but Boris Johnson junked) but Lammy used the Munich stage to land the point that a Starmer government is committed to the European neighbourhood.“It’s absolutely fundamental that the United Kingdom and Europe have the closest of relationships and the Brexit era is over, the situation is settled,” Lammy said, noting that France and the UK have half of Europe’s security capabilities combined.Rebuilding the UK-EU relationshipThe war in Ukraine is the obvious driver for such a pact. But given that post-Brexit Conservative governments (for all their domestic volatility) have been steadfast in their support for Kyiv, the interesting question is how a Labour vision might be different?Part of it is about the touchy-feelies of people politics rather than hard policy substance. I was at an event recently with several senior EU diplomats who lamented the fact that too often the EU-UK conversation (and this includes with Labour) was so narrowly transactional: “we want a vet deal . . . we want a mobility agreement . . . we want . . . ”Which is why any deeper rebuilding of the UK-EU relationship after the Johnson-Frost era (now stabilised by Rishi Sunak) must start with a much broader, deeper commitment to the European neighbourhood and addressing the common challenges we face. Lammy alluded to this, I think.Security is the obvious and uncontentious place to start, but the argument doing the rounds is that there are structural forces that can take the discussion much deeper, including areas of industrial and commercial policy that are not traditionally considered as security.As Mujtaba Rahman, managing director for Europe at Eurasia Group, told me after returning from Munich, the Labour team were keen to define security very broadly, encompassing migration, climate, energy, and even trade and supply chain de-risking. “This will allow Labour to use security as the reset and vehicle through which to also improve the wider UK-EU economic relationship,” argues Rahman.This is an optimistic view of the future.Recall last year that it took nine months for the EU and the UK to agree on a mutual fix to the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement that avoided 10 per cent tariffs being imposed on the export of electric vehicles in both directions across the Channel.This, despite the fact that the EU and UK had an obvious common strategic interest in avoiding imposing tariffs that would have only handed further advantage to the same Chinese manufacturers on which they are trying to become less reliant.The thinking is that in a world where the UK and the EU are in a less zero-sum relationship, that kind of decision should become easier — and logically, so should others, for example on aligning carbon border taxes and managing common threats in the digital sphere.The challenge for the westThe long history of petty EU-UK squabbles (both pre- and post-Brexit) militates against such a deeper strategic rapprochement, but equally, there is a countervailing force created by the need for greater solidarity in the face of the challenges posed by Putin and Xi’s China.That is part of the argument made by Jonathan Black, the UK deputy national security adviser and G7 sherpa, who recently returned from a sabbatical year spent thinking deep thoughts at the Blavatnik School of Government on the Heywood Fellowship (named in memory of the late cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy).The result is a paper which, as the title says, examines the “intersection of security and economic interests” in a more uncertain world where traditionally economic issues — supply chain de-risking, critical minerals, digital hygiene — are now intertwined with security issues.The challenge for the west — and this is a problem seen in miniature in the EU — is achieving the kind of international collaboration on economic issues that has traditionally been the preserve of national security questions.As Black concedes, this isn’t easy, for democratic systems built on openness and competition but challenges are emerging that are forcing a rethink, and that includes the broader relationship between business and the state.As he writes in his foreword: As someone who grew up where “step back” was the presumption, it has been fascinating to see not so much a call for government to “step in” (although there has been some of that), but more to “step alongside” as governments and business navigate these challenges together.After the era of “fuck business” this is, at the very least, a different prism through which to view both domestic business engagement but also the wider possibilities of Lammy’s big-picture offer to the EU.(If you want the reality check on why nothing much will change in the EU-UK relationship if Labour wins the next election and how political gravity will drag both sides down, Anand Menon of the UK in a Changing Europe sets it out here.)My own book speaks to much of this idea of inevitable incrementalism, but big events can drive commensurately big shifts in approach. Past performance does not necessarily have to define what happens next. The alternative is a more optimistic vision that was conjured by Paul Drechsler, the former CBI chair, when speaking at the Independent Commission for Europe event last week.He urged Labour to set out “a positive and compelling narrative” about the UK’s position alongside the EU underpinned by common agendas on digital, defence, net zero but also (to the European diplomat’s point above) a shared cultural outlook built on better mobility.The history of the UK’s relationship with the postwar European integration project suggests this will be an uphill battle, but as Black’s paper implies, there are structural shifts afoot in the global environment that make it not inconceivable either.Brexit in numbersYou are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.This week’s chart is from an analysis by Goldman Sachs into the effects of leaving the EU single market, entitled “The Structural and Cyclical Costs of Brexit,” which estimates that Brexit has lopped five per cent off UK gross domestic product.The Wall Street bank’s analysis uses a counterfactual model that pits the UK’s actual economic performance against a synthetic version of “what might have been” had the UK remained in the EU and which is based on the performance of other comparable economies.The hit to GDP, Goldman’s economists calculated, is caused by a combination of reduced trade, lower immigration from the EU and overall weaker business investment (see chart).Such analyses always cause controversy. The economist Julian Jessop in the Telegraph, who often argues negative Brexit effects are overstated, finds the idea that Brexit has caused a five per cent hit “simply implausible”. He writes:“Business uncertainty and trade frictions have surely had some negative impacts, but do not appear to be anywhere near enough to add up to a 5 per cent hit to GDP.”Economics prof Jonathan Portes at King’s College, London agrees, putting the current Brexit hit at close to 2-3 per cent of GDP, while citing his own analysis, which finds the hit could ultimately reach as much as 6 per cent, but over time. A slow puncture, not a car crash.However, John Springford at the Centre for European Reform — best-known for his own work with “doppelgänger” analysis on the impacts of Brexit — finds Goldman’s analysis to be persuasive. His view is that most of the negative Brexit effects have come through, driven by the sterling fall in 2016 hitting real incomes in 2017 and 2018; business investment stagnating from 2016, and then a 10-15 per cent hit to trade after 2021, which is proving to be enduring.Springford’s view is arguably the more cheering. He doesn’t rule out ongoing, deeper Brexit impacts but given that UK trade performance appears not to be deteriorating further (either against EU or doppelgänger) he reckons we may now have hit the Brexit bottom.If that’s right then, as he tells me, things might be about to get better.In combination with inflation (and hopefully interest rates) coming down, energy prices falling, and high net immigration, growth should therefore pick up unless another shock comes along.Could there be light at the end of the tunnel?Britain after Brexit is edited by Gordon Smith. Premium subscribers can sign up here to have it delivered straight to their inbox every Thursday afternoon. Or you can take out a Premium subscription here. Read earlier editions of the newsletter here.Recommended newsletters for youInside Politics — Follow what you need to know in UK politics. Sign up hereTrade Secrets — A must-read on the changing face of international trade and globalisation. Sign up here More

Stay informed with free updatesSimply sign up to the More

Rivian fell 15% after it forecast flat growth in annual production, also hurt by a shutdown of its assembly line for upgrades. Lucid sank 8% as its production forecast also came below estimates.The companies said an uncertain economic outlook and high-interest rates were hitting demand for EVs, echoing remarks from market leader Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) and legacy automakers like Ford (NYSE:F).”Despite having built a highly rated and desirable EV, Rivian appears to have hit a near-term air-pocket and caught the recent EV bug,” said Canaccord Genuity analyst George Gianarikas, who cut his price target on the stock by $10 to $20.EV startups have been burning billions of dollars in cash in their efforts to develop, source and ramp up manufacturing of vehicles, hoping to be the next Tesla.Rivian was set to lose more than $2 billion in market capitalization if the premarket losses hold, while Lucid’s valuation was set to fall by nearly $1 billion.Their stocks have had a weak start to the year, with Rivian down 34% and Lucid down 12%, after a tumultuous 2023 when Tesla’s price war roiled the industry. Rivian said on Wednesday it expected to post its first gross profit in the fourth quarter, after it reported a loss of about $43,000 per vehicle in the October-December period.In comparison, Ford’s Model E electric vehicle division lost an average of more than $47,000 per vehicle in the same period.CHEAPER MODELSRivian is betting on the R2 sport utility vehicle set to be unveiled next month to compete with Tesla’s best-selling Model Y crossover and attract customers with a smaller and cheaper EV. But the R2 SUV, which is expected to be priced around $50,000, is set to be launched only in 2026.CEO RJ Scaringe said much of the upgrades to the R1 assembly line in the second quarter were made to enable the R2 vehicles.Lucid, meanwhile, plans to start production of the Gravity SUV, with more than 400 miles of range and expected to be priced at $80,000 later this year, with larger volumes expected in 2025 onwards.Lucid also discussed a third model in the midsize category, slated for production in late 2026, but did not provide further details on the model.”We view near-term deliveries as an unknown, with that uncertainty spreading to Lucid’s Gravity SUV launch, with Lucid’s midsize program set for a 2026 debut,” Needham analyst Chris Pierce said. More

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.The writer is EU commissioner for tradeGlobal trade has been a key driver of prosperity and poverty reduction over the past few decades and the World Trade Organization has been at the heart of this. Now, at a time of geopolitical tensions, political uncertainty and the growing weaponisation of trade, the value of multilateral co-operation within the WTO is greater than ever. This new geopolitical reality requires a reformed WTO and is the reason the EU is leading efforts to update the rule book.The existing WTO rules, which still govern the majority of global trade, are our best guardrail against economic fragmentation. The EU continues to be a leading supporter of the organisation. It’s in our interests: almost 60 per cent of EU trade is done under WTO rules. But we now need to see a strong and reformed WTO that can effectively respond to the distinctive challenges of the 21st century. The upcoming 13th ministerial conference of the WTO, which takes place in Abu Dhabi next week, represents a golden opportunity to give further impetus to this organisation. Our aim is to shake up its core functions, from settling disputes to tackling urgent global challenges. The WTO has provided a vital forum for resolving trade disputes over the past quarter of a century. But the Appellate Body became defunct under the Trump administration. As a result, appeals cannot be heard and disputes are left in limbo — or “appealed into the void”. Reforming this dispute settlement system is critical to the WTO’s overall legitimacy and to stopping the erosion of trade rules. It is vital in providing stability for companies to invest and export. The EU and others have now made good progress on a set of reforms, but there is still work to be done to have a fully functioning system, including the possibility of appeal review, as soon as possible. We also want the WTO to strengthen its contribution to sustainability. The organisation delivered on this in 2022 at the last ministerial conference with a landmark agreement to protect our oceans by tackling harmful fisheries subsidies. WTO members must now deliver on the second part of this deal to address overfishing and overcapacity. This would also help us fully meet the relevant UN Sustainable Development Goals. The EU also wants a stronger WTO to ensure that trade can positively contribute to tackling global environmental challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. As part of that, we should enhance dialogue on domestic environmental measures, such as incentivising the green transition in a trade-friendly way. Together with Ecuador, Kenya and New Zealand, I will also be convening the 60-member Coalition of Trade Ministers on Climate to discuss how trade can support climate change objectives.  Agricultural reform and food security will also be of prime importance in Abu Dhabi. Climate change, geopolitical tensions, not least Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine and its weaponisation of food supply, all affect agricultural value chains and food availability. The EU will lead efforts to encourage WTO members to move away from trade-distorting subsidies and embrace the transition to sustainable farming — a goal that the EU has already pursued through successive reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy. The EU will also engage with other members on the pressing issues related to the challenges of the current food insecurity crisis, notably export restrictions applied to food products. Then there is digital trade. Here, we need to modernise the WTO rule book. The key demand of the business community — in developed and developing countries alike — is for ministers to renew the current moratorium on applying duties on ecommerce. This is vital to ensure that countries and businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, can reap the benefits of the fast-growing digital economy. We also want to see a work programme to address the digital divide and we will work hard to secure these outcomes.  More broadly, the WTO must re-establish itself as the key international forum for discussing and delivering on other pressing global policy challenges, such as those posed by industrial policy. We also need to agree an agenda to facilitate the integration of developing countries into the global economy, especially the least developed. An array of challenges is facing us all. Ensuring that the WTO is effective and capable of helping us meet them is in everybody’s interests. More

Typically, the interest on credit card debt comprises borrowing cost determined by the U.S. Federal Reserve and an additional rate charged by the lender. The additional rates, called the annual percentage rate (APR) margin, were raising costs for consumers by billions of dollars a year, CFPB said.Major credit issuers have increased the average APR margin by 4.3 percentage points over the last 10 years, the consumer watchdog said, adding it had found evidence of practices inhibiting customers’ ability to find alternatives to expensive products.The credit card market, being a highly-concentrated industry, has attracted scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers for years. Concerns about competition were renewed this week after Capital One Financial (NYSE:COF) agreed to buy Discover Financial for $35.3 billion, with analysts predicting tough antitrust scrutiny for the proposed merger.CFPB said the APR margin for revolving accounts – a type of credit account that lets customers borrow up to their maximum credit limit – is now at 14.3%, the highest in recent history.This has boosted the profitability of credit card companies. Last week, the watchdog said that large credit card companies that dominate the market charge higher interest rates than smaller banks and credit unions. More

Turkey’s central bank has hiked rates by a cumulative 3,650 basis points since May 2023.
Inflation in the country of 85 million last month jumped 6.7% from December — its biggest monthly increase since August — and rose 64.8% year-on-year.
Economists expect a hold on the current interest rate for much of 2024, and some see inflation roughly halving by the end of the year.

Turkish flag over a DenizBank building. Turkey is expected to head to the polls on Sunday.
Ismail Ferdous | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Turkey’s central bank held its key interest rate on Thursday, keeping it at 45% despite soaring inflation after eight consecutive months of hikes.
The move was widely expected as the bank indicated in January that its 250-basis-point hikes would be its last for the year, despite inflation now at roughly 65%.

Consumer prices in the country of 85 million last month jumped 6.7% from December — its biggest monthly jump since August — according to the Turkish central bank’s figures. They rose 64.8% year-on-year in January.
Turkey’s key interest rate climbed by a cumulative 3,650 basis points since May 2023. The latest decision to hold rates, rather than cut them, signals consistency from the newly appointed Turkish central bank governor Fatih Karahan with the strategy of his predecessor, Hafize Erkan. Karahan took office in early February.
Analysts viewed the accompanying press statement from the central bank as hawkish and indicating no easing of rates in the near future.
“The Committee assesses that the current level of the policy rate will be maintained until there is a significant and sustained decline in the underlying trend of monthly inflation and until inflation expectations converge to the projected forecast range,” the bank’s statement said. “Monetary policy stance will be tightened in case a significant and persistent deterioration in inflation outlook is anticipated.”
Economists expect a hold on the current interest rate for much of 2024, and see inflation roughly halving by the end of the year — meaning monetary easing could still be on the cards.

“An extended interest rate pause is likely in our view over the coming months. With inflation likely to end the year at 30-35% (broadly in line with the CBRT’s forecast of 36%), there is still a possibility that the central bank starts an easing cycle before the end of the year, which many analysts are expecting,” Liam Peach, senior emerging markets economist at London-based Capital Economics, wrote in a note Thursday.
“But our baseline view remains that interest rates will stay on hold throughout this year and that rate cuts won’t arrive until early next year.” More

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for freeRoula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.The European Central Bank has announced its first annual loss for almost two decades, prompting policymakers to carry forward an annual deficit to offset against future profits for the first time.The €1.3bn loss for 2023 reflects the impact of higher interest rates paid to national central banks, which the ECB has raised to a record level in response to the biggest surge in inflation in its history.The central bank would have made a much bigger loss last year if it had not drawn on the remaining €6.6bn of provisions it built up in recent years to cover financial risks.Higher rates pushed up the ECB’s net interest expense, reflecting a sharp rise in interest paid to other national central banks that share the euro, from €900mn in 2022 to €7.2bn last year. However, the interest the ECB earns on the vast portfolio of bonds bought over the past decade has not increased anywhere near as much as many of these are long-term government securities that have locked in low or even negative rates for many years.Central bank losses are likely to be seized on by critics of their recent massive bond purchases, with one case against this still pending in the German constitutional court. Public finances will also be hit by an end to the big dividends finance ministers were used to receiving from central banks.But while the loss could increase political pressure on the ECB and threaten its independence, most analysts think it should not matter whether central banks are profitable.“I don’t see any meaningful implication for policy at this stage,” said Frederik Ducrozet, head of macroeconomic research at Pictet Wealth Management. One concern had been that governments might need to bail out some northern central banks with the highest losses, such as the Dutch one. But this risk faded after De Nederlandsche Bank agreed a plan with the government to rebuild its capital from future profits.The downturn in the ECB’s financial outlook had already forced it to scrap the dividend it pays to national central banks last year. These dividend payments — which amounted to €5.8bn between 2018 and 2022 — are usually passed on by national central banks to eurozone governments.The central bank said it was “likely to incur losses over the next few years, but is then projected to return to making sustained profits”. It added that its balance sheet was backed by its capital and “substantial revaluation accounts”, which together totalled €46bn at the end of last year.“In any case, the ECB can operate effectively and fulfil its primary mandate of maintaining price stability regardless of any losses,” it added.The last time the ECB made an annual loss was in 2004 when it was hit by foreign exchange losses due to the rapid appreciation of the euro, but it absorbed that loss rather than rolling it forward. Last year, the ECB made zero profits as it used provisions to offset a €1.6bn deficit.The ECB has been slowly reducing the €4.7tn bond portfolio it owns along with the eurozone’s national central banks since last year, while the ultra-cheap loans it gave to commercial banks during the pandemic have also been expiring. These moves helped to shrink the balance sheet of the eurosystem — which includes the ECB and 20 national central banks — to €6.94tn at the end of last year — down from a peak above €8.8tn in mid-2022. More

This article is an on-site version of our Energy Source newsletter. Sign up here to get the newsletter sent straight to your inbox every Tuesday and ThursdayGood morning and welcome back to Energy Source, coming to you from New York.US energy secretary Jennifer Granholm played down concerns regarding the Joe Biden administration’s pause on permits for new liquefied natural gas terminals in a wide-ranging interview at the National Press Club in Washington yesterday.“We are the largest exporter of natural gas in the world, and we will continue to be the largest exporter,” Granholm said. “[The pause] is not going to impact any relationship that we have with our allies or their ability to access energy.”The remarks come as the Biden administration faces backlash against its decision to pause permits. Last week, the Republican-led House of Representatives passed a bill that would undo this freeze. The Democrat-controlled Senate has yet to approve the legislation.Elsewhere, the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands yesterday in a setback for environmentalists, and the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a potentially consequential case over the Environmental Protection Agency’s “good neighbour” policy finalised last year, which addresses interstate pollution.Today’s newsletter looks at one of the largest US solar factories starting production this month, less than two years after the passage of Biden’s landmark climate law. The factory, a joint venture between renewable giants Invenergy and Longi, has sparked concerns from some local residents over its Chinese ties, but it’s also causing shifts in attitudes towards clean energy and blue-collar jobs. We end with a quick dive into the projected slowdown in US oil production growth. Thanks for reading, AmandaChinese-backed solar factory highlights Biden’s clean energy conundrums This week, one of the largest US solar panel factories began production in Pataskala, a rural town on the outskirts of Columbus, Ohio, the state capital.The $600mn factory, known as Illuminate USA, is a joint venture between two of the biggest players in clean energy: Invenergy, the largest private US renewables developer, and China-based Longi, the world’s largest solar panel manufacturer.The factory is one of dozens of clean energy manufacturing projects being built across the country and serves as an important case study on how Biden’s landmark climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, is transforming small towns in an election year.“It’s a catalytic project for Pataskala,” said Alexis Fitzsimmons, executive director of Grow Licking County, the local economic development organisation. “Those are good-paying manufacturing jobs that are going to increase the wealth of our citizens in our region.”The IRA included lucrative tax credits to rapidly decarbonise the country’s economy while building out a domestic manufacturing base for clean technologies to reduce reliance on China, the world’s dominant producer. Kurt Wagner, chief financial officer of Illuminate USA, said the tax credits were “an important financial component” for the project.You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.Illuminate USA is located in the county of Licking, which voted for former president Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020. Licking is on the frontline of the White House’s strategic supply chain initiatives, with Intel planning to build semiconductor factories worth $20bn in the county. That has helped drive unemployment to a record low. But the factory’s ties to a Chinese company have sparked concerns among some residents, who accuse the Illuminate USA project of serving as a warehouse for the Chinese Communist party. Longi, meanwhile, has warned the west that their countries risk slowing down the energy transition if they restrict Chinese companies from their supply chains. My story last week has more on the opposition and what it tells us about the Chinese conundrum facing the US energy transition.Another important theme is how the project is reshaping attitudes towards clean energy and manufacturing in the local community. At full production, Illuminate USA will employ more than 1,000 workers, marking the largest manufacturing project in Pataskala to date.“I’m much more aware now of how much we’ve not been looking at or utilising renewable energy,” said Patrick Killoran, a production line operator at Illuminate USA. Killoran earns 45 per cent more making solar panels than at his previous manufacturing job and would like to purchase solar panels for his future home.John Berry, president of Central Ohio Technical College, said the factory marks a “golden moment” for trade professions. A “significant amount” of students with bachelor degrees have returned for a technical education, he added.“There is an understanding that this is a new era of manufacturing,” Berry told Energy Source. “These are long-term stable careers that can really change the lives of students and their families.”But whether these jobs can help shore up more support for Biden is less clear. More Americans trust Trump to handle the economy, according to the most recent FT-Michigan Ross survey. A poll last summer by the Washington Post and the University of Maryland found the majority of voters were not aware of the IRA. The US is at an inflection point for solar, which is expected to be the leading source of growth in the country’s electric power sector through 2025. At the same time, solar manufacturers are facing a global reckoning as a glut in panels spurred by overproduction in China threatens their viability — a situation the US is relatively insulated from because of subsidies in the IRA.Former Trump officials have told the FT that he will gut the climate law if elected president in November, a scenario the solar industry has warned would be “devastating”.“The IRA is essentially 100 per cent of the reason why we are talking about solar manufacturing today,” said Pol Lezcano, an analyst at BloombergNEF. “Some of these factories will be cost competitive but only after subsidies.”Illuminate USA and its workers aren’t worried about a potential change in the administration. Wagner said the company “will deal with the challenge” if the tax credits went away.Killoran, the production line operator, doesn’t see his job tied to Biden’s policies and plans to vote for Trump in November.“I think [Biden] is ruining this country at a rapid pace,” he said. “The manufacturing aspect, I think Trump would be a better one to have.”US oil production snapshotGrowth in US onshore oil production is set for a slowdown. A new outlook from Wood Mackenzie expects oil production in the lower forty-eight states to grow by 270,000 barrels a day in 2024, down from 900,000 b/d last year, and the lowest growth rate since 2016, excluding Covid-19 pandemic years. The deceleration comes as inflation, private consolidation and declining rig count hamper supply. Wood Mackenzie’s forecast for 2024 is higher than the outlook from the US Energy Information Administration, which expects oil production in the lower forty-eight states to grow by 110,000 b/d this year and 360,000 b/d in 2025. Despite slower growth, US oil output, which sits at a historic high, is still set for new heights.But the slowdown in US production growth removes some of the pressure from Opec+ producers to cut production to buoy prices, said Ann-Louise Hittle, vice-president of oil markets at Wood Mackenzie.“The slower US growth rate in oil production could be a price supportive factor as Wood Mackenzie expects strong oil demand growth,” Hittle said. The consultancy expects Brent, the global benchmark, to average $85.90 a barrel for 2024.Job MovesØrsted nominated Lene Skole and Andrew Brown to serve as chair and deputy chair, respectively, of its board of directors.Avangrid appointed Justin Lagasse as chief financial officer and senior vice-president. Lagasse has been serving as interim CFO since November following the departure of Patricia Cosgel.EnCore Energy appointed Shona Wilson as chief financial officer. Wilson joins the US uranium developer from electricity analytics firm kWantix.SunPower appointed Tom Werner as executive chair of its board. Werner previously served as the residential solar company’s chief executive.Power PointsEnergy Source is written and edited by Jamie Smyth, Myles McCormick, Amanda Chu and Tom Wilson, with support from the FT’s global team of reporters. Reach us at [email protected] and follow us on X at @FTEnergy. Catch up on past editions of the newsletter here.Recommended newsletters for youMoral Money — Our unmissable newsletter on socially responsible business, sustainable finance and more. Sign up hereThe Climate Graphic: Explained — Understanding the most important climate data of the week. Sign up here More