3 ms·

> Yes they did [EDF "bankruptcy"] >This is not true. Yes it is. It was reported in just about every language on earth, look at any newspaper you wish. Here's o

> Yes they did [EDF "bankruptcy"] >This is not true. Yes it is. It was reported in just about every language on earth, look at any newspaper you wish. Here's one. https://www.neimagazine.com/news/france-to-renationalise-edf-9838179/?cf-view https://www.neimagazine.com/news/france-to-renationalise-edf... The reasons given for the renationalization were "EDF's problems are above all under-capitalisation and under-remuneration." Which means "they are not profitable". >Until 2004 France owned 100% of EDF. They sold just 16%. And then took it back. That changes nothing of what I said - they "Took it back" by paying 10 billion euros of taxpayer money. >The state did not "take over" €50 billion in debt. You might argue that the taxpayers were always on the hook for this debt. It was only documented and formalized when France bought the whole thing. Ltting EDF go bellyup and not paying was never on the table, that's the hook of nuclear power. But that's semantics. 50 billion of debt will be paid by the taxpayers sooner or later. You have failed to refute my claim of 80 billion in hidden costs and are instead arguing sidepoints and semantics. The unemotional thing to do would be to say "Ah yes, of course we need to account for at least those 80 billion, that's true". I thought you said you were the rational one with evidence and the opponents were all emotional. 80 billion is not emotions, it's evidence, and you're trying hard to pretend it doesn't exist. Why is that? >It looks like the utilities paid the federal government for the repository, but are not getting the services they paid for. But they didn't pay for it. They may have paid 750 million per year but that's not anywhere close to enough. Remember Sellafield? This is another example of how the operators pretend to be profitable - they pay nowhere near enough to cover the costs, but they have negotiated a deal that makes that a taxpayer problem. In their books they just write "waste management, paid in full" and the rest of the payment is covered by taxpayers. A hidden expense. This is again a fact that you seem unwilling to accept. Why?

mpweiher 2y ago
> It was reported You should read your sources. It confirms what I wrote and contradicts what you wrote. > they "Took it back" No. Not if "it" was "EDF". Because "it" was a minority 16 percent stake. > 50 billion of debt will be paid by the taxpayers sooner or later. No it won't. Which part of "profitable" and "investment" do you not understand? > You have failed to refute my claim of 80 billion in hidden costs There was nothing there to refute. You are free to make up random stuff, I will continue to ignore your made up stuff, as even the claims for which you provide sources turn out to be untrue, contradicted by the very sources you bring. > But they didn't pay for it. But they did. So much, in fact, that the federal government now has to pay them for breach of contract. Sellafield is not Yucca mountain, and is much more than just a storage facility. "Sellafield, formerly known as Windscale, is a large multi-function nuclear site close to ... " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sellafield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sellafield > they pay nowhere near enough to cover the costs, They paid more than the costs. Look it up.
- Kon5ole 2y ago
  >> 50 billion of debt will be paid by the taxpayers sooner or later. >No it won't. Which part of "profitable" and "investment" do you not understand? A company that drowns in debt and needs government bailouts is not profitable by any definition of the word. Investments generate profits after you have paid for them, so nuclear is clearly not an investment - it costs more money every year. EDF could pretend to be profitable in the beginning but now the facts have caught up. The true cost of nuclear is undeniable in the long run. That's why France now has increased the price of nuclear power by over 60%: https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/france-strikes-an-agreement-with-edf-over-nuclear-energy-prices https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication... Turns out EDF was selling nuclear power below production cost all these years, they just pretended that the production costs were low by neglecting maintenance and borrowing money. As I said - not profitable.
  - mpweiher 2y ago
    > A company that drowns in debt and needs government bailouts is not profitable by any definition of the word. They're not "drowning" in debt, they're not being bailed out and they are most definitely profitable. > [nuclear] costs more money every year You might want to actually look at the EDF financial reports... > That's why France now has increased the price of nuclear power by over 60% Also not true. France has increased the "price" of the ARENH program, which allows companies access to 25% of EDFs cheap nuclear capacity at low prices. > Turns out EDF was selling nuclear power below production cost all these year Turns out the ARENH program legally required EDF to sell 25% of its production at a very low fixed price. Even if it needed that electricity itself, which meant it often had to buy that same electricity it had produced back from those same competitors at a higher price. At the height of the energy crisis at a 25x higher price. > As I said - not profitable. Yes, you keep saying it, and it keeps being wrong. 2023, € 10 billion in profits. https://www.edf.fr/sites/groupe/files/2024-02/annual-results-2023-consolidated-financial-statements-2024-02-16.pdf https://www.edf.fr/sites/groupe/files/2024-02/annual-results... I would like to be this "not profitable"
- Kon5ole 2y ago
  >> It was reported >You should read your sources. It confirms what I wrote and contradicts what you wrote. It most certainly does not. Maybe english is not your first language? Here is a story in spanish about how France gave EDF 2.1 billion euros in 2022. https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2022/02/18/companias/1645176934_613827.html https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2022/02/18/companias/... "We're not going to nationalize it" said the politician. Months later, they paid another 10 billion euros to do just that, here is the story in dutch: https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/macron-biedt-10-miljard-voor-totale-grip-op-energiebedrijf-edf~b253a5c3/ https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/macron-biedt-10-miljard-v... So in 2022, France gave EDF directly over 12 billion euros. Saying they had 9 billion in profits when they were given 12 buillion by the state is a bit odd. Surely a cool free 12 billion on top of the "insane profits" they generate on their own can't be less than the money they were given? A grandfather who spends money using his grandchildren's credit cards is not profitable. And that is basically what EDF is doing. The sad fact is that France has dug itself into a hole. They have a huge industry around nuclear, which is at the end of any pretense of profitability with an enormous mountain of unpaid costs coming up in the centuries ahead. This will be a burden on France's economy - the credit cards have run out, now the grandchildren have to pay.

mpweiher 2y ago

> It was reported You should read your sources. It confirms what I wrote and contradicts what you wrote. > they "Took it back" No. Not if "it" was "EDF". Because "it" was a minority 16 percent stake. > 50 billion of debt will be paid by the taxpayers sooner or later. No it won't. Which part of "profitable" and "investment" do you not understand? > You have failed to refute my claim of 80 billion in hidden costs There was nothing there to refute. You are free to make up random stuff, I will continue to ignore your made up stuff, as even the claims for which you provide sources turn out to be untrue, contradicted by the very sources you bring. > But they didn't pay for it. But they did. So much, in fact, that the federal government now has to pay them for breach of contract. Sellafield is not Yucca mountain, and is much more than just a storage facility. "Sellafield, formerly known as Windscale, is a large multi-function nuclear site close to ... " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sellafield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sellafield > they pay nowhere near enough to cover the costs, They paid more than the costs. Look it up.

Kon5ole 2y ago
>> 50 billion of debt will be paid by the taxpayers sooner or later. >No it won't. Which part of "profitable" and "investment" do you not understand? A company that drowns in debt and needs government bailouts is not profitable by any definition of the word. Investments generate profits after you have paid for them, so nuclear is clearly not an investment - it costs more money every year. EDF could pretend to be profitable in the beginning but now the facts have caught up. The true cost of nuclear is undeniable in the long run. That's why France now has increased the price of nuclear power by over 60%: https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/france-strikes-an-agreement-with-edf-over-nuclear-energy-prices https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication... Turns out EDF was selling nuclear power below production cost all these years, they just pretended that the production costs were low by neglecting maintenance and borrowing money. As I said - not profitable.
- mpweiher 2y ago
  > A company that drowns in debt and needs government bailouts is not profitable by any definition of the word. They're not "drowning" in debt, they're not being bailed out and they are most definitely profitable. > [nuclear] costs more money every year You might want to actually look at the EDF financial reports... > That's why France now has increased the price of nuclear power by over 60% Also not true. France has increased the "price" of the ARENH program, which allows companies access to 25% of EDFs cheap nuclear capacity at low prices. > Turns out EDF was selling nuclear power below production cost all these year Turns out the ARENH program legally required EDF to sell 25% of its production at a very low fixed price. Even if it needed that electricity itself, which meant it often had to buy that same electricity it had produced back from those same competitors at a higher price. At the height of the energy crisis at a 25x higher price. > As I said - not profitable. Yes, you keep saying it, and it keeps being wrong. 2023, € 10 billion in profits. https://www.edf.fr/sites/groupe/files/2024-02/annual-results-2023-consolidated-financial-statements-2024-02-16.pdf https://www.edf.fr/sites/groupe/files/2024-02/annual-results... I would like to be this "not profitable"
Kon5ole 2y ago
>> It was reported >You should read your sources. It confirms what I wrote and contradicts what you wrote. It most certainly does not. Maybe english is not your first language? Here is a story in spanish about how France gave EDF 2.1 billion euros in 2022. https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2022/02/18/companias/1645176934_613827.html https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2022/02/18/companias/... "We're not going to nationalize it" said the politician. Months later, they paid another 10 billion euros to do just that, here is the story in dutch: https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/macron-biedt-10-miljard-voor-totale-grip-op-energiebedrijf-edf~b253a5c3/ https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/macron-biedt-10-miljard-v... So in 2022, France gave EDF directly over 12 billion euros. Saying they had 9 billion in profits when they were given 12 buillion by the state is a bit odd. Surely a cool free 12 billion on top of the "insane profits" they generate on their own can't be less than the money they were given? A grandfather who spends money using his grandchildren's credit cards is not profitable. And that is basically what EDF is doing. The sad fact is that France has dug itself into a hole. They have a huge industry around nuclear, which is at the end of any pretense of profitability with an enormous mountain of unpaid costs coming up in the centuries ahead. This will be a burden on France's economy - the credit cards have run out, now the grandchildren have to pay.