Le Monde | • Updated | By
” I resigned in despair. In despair at all. I did not want to leave EDF, a company that I loved so much defend. “
Thomas Thornton, the former financial director of the power company, was released Wednesday, May 4 the silence he had imposed since his departure, 1 st of March. Deep voice, taut face, the former Finance group has delivered to the National Assembly an uplifting testimony, making up a notch already strong pressure to EDF postponed at least a few years his great nuclear project in the United Kingdom
Read also:. English EPR waltzed heads at EDF
For the former CFO was clear : his resignation is directly related to two EPR nuclear reactors planned at Hinkley Point in Britain. An investment estimated at 24 billion euros, and judged far too risky. If Mr. Thornton slammed the door after spending six years in the group is not “ likely endorse a decision, in case of trouble, to bring EDF in a situation similar to that of Areva “ that of a large public company under threat of bankruptcy, has he said.
what to bring water to the mill of those who , outside and especially within EDF, oppose the immediate launch of this huge project. Before the unanimous opposition of unions and reserves of more independent directors, the CEO, Jean-Bernard Lévy, agreed on April 22 to further postpone the decision on the subject, and checking with the central works council (CEC). It will hold a first meeting on Monday, May 9 this case. There is every chance that demand outside expertise. Elected staff would then have until early July to give their opinion. In practice, the choice of EDF or not to invest in Britain will be offset at least a few months.
“deadly for EDF and industry”
for the CEO of EDF’s eyes as the economy minister, Emmanuel Macron, this deferral does not affect the rapid launch of a project presented as decisive for the whole of the nuclear industry. The government is “attached” to the realization of Hinkley Point, a Project “essential” without which there will be “hundreds of layoffs” Areva, said the minister on May 2 during a visit to the factory of the nuclear group in Le Creusot (Saône-et-Loire).
“the immediate launch of this project would be deadly for EDF and die, “ say the contrary EDF unions. According to them, the decision must be postponed for at least three years. This is also what Mr. Thornton had proposed its CEO early 2015, without being heard. “What is three years for a project of ninety years? “, argues today the former CFO. Of course, EDF would have had to renegotiate with its British customer and with suppliers. “How to think that signing a hurry contract will never be renegotiated,” and the British agree to overpay their electricity for years?
“Who would bet 60% or 70% of its assets on a
technology which we still do not know if it works? “Thomas Thornton, former CFO of EDF
Read also: Hinkley point a project fraught with pitfalls
In 2013, when EDF signed an agreement with the British authorities to build two new generation reactors in Somerset, unions like Mr. Thornton had nevertheless applauded. But since then the situation has changed completely, said Wednesday the former CFO. The British government has given up grant its financial guarantee for the project, considered a given seed the delay of other EPR under construction in Finland and at Flamanville (Manche). Areva has plunged into crisis, and is no longer able to finance its planned 10%. The situation of the EDF group itself has deteriorated, due to the woes of Flamanville and especially the electricity price collapse in Europe. This fall, deemed sustainable, “changes all the EDF business model,” by Mr. Thornton.
Find partners
In these circumstances trigger such a massive investment has become very bold. Especially EDF, with the construction of the EPR in Finland and France, already has committed many of these reactors. “We arrive at the end of 2015 a considerable amount: 14 billion euros have already been invested in this technology, 58% of equity” group said Mr. Thornton. “Add back an EPR project seemed impossible,” said the former leader, appointed by the former CEO Henri Proglio. “Who would bet 60% or 70% of its assets on a technology which we still do not know if it works? “ Beyond financial constraints, it is the strategy of all-nuclear, and even all-EPR, which is challenged by the same defenders of the atom, be it a “nucleocrat” as Mr. Mead or EDF unions, very attached to a production that has been the strength and the company’s glory.
Mr. Levy refused to postpone the British project, Mr. Thornton looked in 2015 several solutions to make the playable case, he recounted. The first was to find partners to share the investment. But having been around the world, it appeared that besides the Chinese, longtime partners group, “nobody was willing to take the risk EPR”.
The breaking point
Mr. Thornton then suggested to involve the French nuclear industry itself at Hinkley Point, for example through an investment company that would have held 10% instead of Areva. This track has not been accepted, no more than another project funding envisaged by the former CFO
There remained a final solution. “A significant strengthening of equity. “ That is to say, a significant increase in capital, the type of 4 billion euros, the principle has been decided by the state. But at the time, the CEO of EDF wanted to go fast. He intended launch Hinkley Point in January or February, with no guarantee on the mentioned recapitalization. For Mr. Santos, the subject was the breaking point. “What I should have done? Silence me? Go ? I would have committed professional misconduct. “ In all conscience, he preferred an exceptional gesture in such cases: the resignation
Read also:. The state steals the EDF rescue
Hinkley Point
the construction of two EPR nuclear reactors planned at Hinkley Point, in Britain, is a project to ensured profitability, says EDF. According to the agreement with London, the production will be sold at a guaranteed price of 92.50 pounds (or 116 euros) per megawatt hour during the first thirty five years of operation. EDF expects a profit of at least 9% per year … provided that this price is not challenged, and that the investment does not slip. Two fairly random conditions. There is “a risk of major construction,” admitted the former CFO ThomasPiquemal Wednesday 4th Maia National Assembly.
No comments:
Post a Comment