3 ms·

>> 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 compan

>> 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"

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"