reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In 2010, Nicolas Sarkozy signed a law to liberalize the market due to pressure from the European Commission, which threatened France with a €20 billion fine for unfair competition because of its low electricity prices. As a result, an artificial market was created with 125 alternative suppliers. This has led to EDF accumulating €64 billion in debt. The speaker argues that this system is unsustainable, as the main competitor sells its production at the same price to all its rivals without going bankrupt. They suggest removing these alternative suppliers to stop the increasing costs for consumers.

EDF, a French public company, was created in 1946 to unify electricity production, transportation, and supply. They successfully electrified France and became one of the world's top exporters. EDF had a monopoly, meaning French citizens had to go to them for electricity, eliminating the need for marketing. This allowed EDF to plan long-term electricity production and finance large infrastructure projects like nuclear power plants. However, financial interests wanted to privatize EDF's profits. They used media propaganda, funding campaigns, and European free trade treaties to open up competition. In 2010, the NOM law allowed other suppliers to sell electricity to individuals, breaking EDF's monopoly.

The speakers discuss the importance of successfully transitioning to clean energy and the need for strong decisions. They mention the plan to reduce nuclear power to 50% by 2035, which would involve closing 14 reactors. The first speaker confirms the government's intention to fully own EDF, which would help the company carry out ambitious projects. The second speaker believes that having 50% nuclear power is not a security issue and highlights that France is the only country with 72% of its electricity coming from nuclear sources.

This is the story of a decline. After World War II, France created Électricité de France (EDF), a national public company that became a global leader in the nuclear power program. EDF became the world's largest electricity producer, while GDF Suez (now Engie) became the second largest. However, in the 1990s, the European Union introduced liberalization directives, which led to the introduction of competition in the electricity sector. This resulted in higher prices as intermediaries bought electricity from EDF at low prices and sold it at market rates. The creation of a European electricity market further complicated matters, as the cost of the last power plant turned on determined the prices.

EDF is facing financial difficulties, so the speaker supports its renationalization. They believe that privatization should only happen when a company is doing well. The speaker also wants EDF to merge with Enedis and disconnect from the European market's pricing system, which is causing small businesses to struggle. They mention petitions signed by thousands of entrepreneurs who are struggling financially. The speaker emphasizes that this issue is important and calls for support. They give examples of companies like Michelin, whose electricity bills have skyrocketed, and warn that if the situation continues, companies may relocate outside of France. The speaker points out that Spain and Portugal have disconnected from the pricing system and have reasonable electricity prices.

We are in ongoing discussions with Germany about Nord Stream 2. It is important to note that if Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 will not proceed.

We are in ongoing discussions with Germany about Nord Stream 2. It is important to note that if Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 will not proceed.

The speaker announces plans to open Venezuela for foreign investment, describing a $1,700,000,000,000 opportunity across multiple sectors. The opportunity is not limited to oil and gas, which are highlighted as huge, but also spans mining (including gold), infrastructure, and power. The speaker emphasizes that the opportunities will touch the entire energy value chain, stating that they will open all upstream, midstream, and downstream activities to all companies. In addition to energy, the speaker identifies opportunities in technology, AI, and tourism. They note that Venezuela has 2,800 kilometres of pristine Caribbean coastland ready to be developed, suggesting significant potential for coastal or tourism-related projects. A central part of the plan is to establish a favorable environment for foreign investment. The speaker asserts that they will bring rule of law, open markets, and security for foreign investment. They also mention a transparent massive privatization program that is waiting for investors, implying a broad and clear path to privatizations as part of the reform agenda. Key points highlighted include: - A $1.7 trillion opportunity encompassing oil and gas, mining (gold), infrastructure, and power. - The energy sector potential described as DRIP with 17 gigawatts of opportunity that needs rehab, indicating substantial modernization and development needs. - Broad openness to investment across the entire oil and gas value chain: upstream, midstream, downstream. - Additional growth areas in technology, AI, and tourism. - 2,800 kilometres of Caribbean coastline ready for development. - Commitments to rule of law, open markets, security for foreign investment, and a transparent privatization program designed to attract international investors. The overall message is that Venezuela is positioning itself as a major, diversified investment destination with a comprehensive framework to protect and promote foreign investment, underpinned by large-scale privatization and development of a broad range of sectors.

EDF, the cheapest energy provider in Europe, has successfully met all challenges and achieved a remarkable advantage in greenhouse gas emissions. However, there was a need to establish a market price, even though there was no market. This price was based on gas, despite not using it, because Germany does. The obsession for the past thirty years has been to dismantle EDF, and they have succeeded. The absurdity of selling one's own production to virtual competitors with no production obligations is surreal. EDF has few competitors, mainly some scattered wind turbines and solar fields, which is laughable.

The speaker discusses the loyalty project and its connection to Brussels. They explain that Brussels has no legitimacy in this matter and that they use the queen to pass through the regulated access to historical nuclear energy. This access requires EDF to sell energy to its competitors at a fixed price of 42 euros per terawatt-hour, which has not been changed since 2011. The speaker argues that this price is now suicidal for EDF and that if they want to change it, they must get approval from the commission. The speaker criticizes this process as mafia-like and emphasizes that if EDF wants to increase the price, they must dismantle. They also express frustration with the claim that these people are liberals, as selling energy at market prices would solve many issues.

I want to be clear with our fellow citizens, there will be no catch-up on their electricity bills. French consumers will not see any catch-up related to this financing need on their bills in 2023. There will be no catch-up on consumers' electricity bills for a simple reason. We made a promise with the President of the Republic, and we will keep that promise.

EDF, a French public company, was created in 1946 to unify electricity production, transportation, and supply. They successfully electrified France and became one of the top global exporters. EDF had a monopoly, meaning French citizens had to go to them for electricity, eliminating the need for marketing. This allowed EDF to plan long-term electricity production and finance large infrastructure projects like nuclear power plants. The stability of their customer base and pricing further supported their planning. However, there were efforts by financial interests to privatize EDF's profits. These efforts gained momentum with the introduction of European free trade treaties and laws in the 2000s, such as the NOM law in 2010, which opened up electricity suppliers to competition.

I apologize, Mr. President, but I cannot stay silent. You have broken regulated energy tariffs, liberalized the market, and created a system that demands EDF to give 25% of nuclear energy funds to its competitors. Twelve years later, they haven't invested a single euro. During the lockdown, when the free market dropped to 21 euros, they all went to court to exit. But when the market went above 40 euros after the lockdown, they came back demanding more volume. This is not consumer protection; it's organized exploitation. The CRE estimated that over 60% of regulated tariff increases were driven by alternative actors wanting to compete with EDF. This system has been exploiting EDF for 12 years, and you continue to support it. They don't even respect the contract, yet you give them more. They are sharks, always ready to feast on others' expense.

We are not in trouble because of a lack of energy or amateurs. We need to talk about things. These people are great, but they are inexperienced. Macron has been here for 6 years and didn't think about all this before. We are dependent now, whereas France used to be a leader in electricity. We had the strongest nuclear potential in the world and could export electricity. But now we are begging because we followed Germany's lead. This is not Europe, it's German Europe. The Franco-German relationship is a disaster for France. We need to break free from this imperialism.

We are in a serious situation that is harming the country's interests. Last week, there was a power outage, and the losses for EDF can be estimated. The RTE report shows the electricity production, consumption, and exports. Due to reactor shutdowns, EDF should have earned €22 billion. Additionally, EDF is obligated to sell electricity to competitors at €42 per megawatt-hour, resulting in a loss of €28 billion. EDF is also required to buy wind-generated electricity at €91 per megawatt-hour but cannot resell it, costing the state €7 billion. In total, the losses amount to €57 billion. If everything had gone perfectly, EDF would have earned €40 billion last year.

The speaker discusses how the French government is subsidizing the electricity market instead of decoupling it from financial markets. They argue that this decision will have terrible consequences for the country's electricity production and market. The solution proposed is the complete nationalization of EDF and reinvestment in the energy mix. The speaker also suggests the idea of socializing the use of pallet fires as a way to cope with the situation. They encourage viewers to share this information to resist government propaganda and defend their interests. The speaker thanks the Socialize Energy Collective for their support and mentions their goal of advocating for the nationalization of EDF.

We don't want to be like the European Union, we don't care about them. We are French and we stick to French laws.

In 2010, Nicolas Sarkozy signed a law to liberalize the market due to pressure from the European Commission, which threatened France with a €20 billion fine for unfair competition because of our low electricity prices. This led to the creation of an artificial market with 125 alternative suppliers, who don't produce electricity but provide bills. It's strange that EDF, the main competitor, has lost €20 billion and now has €64 billion in debt. This system needs to end because it's not realistic for the main competitor to sell electricity to all its rivals at its production cost without going bankrupt. The more alternative suppliers there are, the more expensive electricity becomes.

EDF produces 80% of the electricity in France, and their winter production is almost sufficient. There is no need to buy electricity from intermediaries or the market. The government's decision to maintain these laws is creating a major energy crisis in France. We could have been one of the few European countries to withstand sanctions, but now we might sink like the others. The solution is to reestablish EDF's monopoly so that everyone buys electricity directly from them. This should have been done years ago, especially when sanctions were imposed on Russia. The government's failure to anticipate the price surge proves their incompetence in managing our interests. They cannot blame Putin; it is their fault.

Technically, nothing changes in the electricity production and distribution process. The idea of private suppliers and property rights is just an accounting illusion that costs EDF over eight billion euros annually. This decision was made by the government to create a financial class of private electricity suppliers who profit without investing. In 2022, the government increased the electricity quota for EDF, forcing them to buy electricity they themselves produced at a higher price and sell it to private suppliers at a loss. This accounting operation cost EDF 28 billion euros, which could have been used for energy transition and maintenance. As a result, EDF is in a financial crisis, requiring regular capital injections from the government and neglecting nuclear plant maintenance. This has led to losing international contracts to the Russian state-owned company, Rosatom.

We are in ongoing discussions with Germany about Nord Stream 2. I want to emphasize that if Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 will not proceed.

The speaker discusses the impact of the ARENNE, a policy that allows private suppliers to receive a portion of EDF's electricity production. This means that EDF's share of the electricity production becomes smaller, while private suppliers still receive a significant portion. With an increasing number of customers leaving for private suppliers, EDF is left with fewer resources to meet demand. If the law is not changed, EDF will have to buy electricity from the market at a high cost to supply its customers, resulting in significant financial losses. This situation will lead to a loss of customers for private suppliers, who may go bankrupt. EDF will then have to buy back its own electricity from the market at a much higher price, causing substantial financial losses.

In France, the speaker explains that the country operates under a neoliberal system rather than a liberal one. They argue that when financiers cannot win through competition, the government intervenes to manipulate the market so that the financiers always come out on top. This is what will happen with EDF, as the state has mandated that EDF must sell 25% of its production to private suppliers at a cost price of €49 per megawatt-hour. This means that EDF will lose 25% of its profits, allowing private companies to add their margins and make a profit. However, these profits will not be used to maintain the nuclear power plants. The speaker questions why EDF didn't use its existing profits to invest in renewable energy instead. They argue that most of these private suppliers rely on the cheap electricity they obtain from EDF rather than investing in renewables themselves. The speaker clarifies that it is still EDF producing the electricity, but they issue fake ownership titles to private suppliers who then sell it back to consumers at a higher price.

The speaker discusses the increase in electricity prices, stating that the previous two years saw a nearly 45% increase. However, they clarify that the statement that future increases will not exceed 10% does not mean it will be exactly 10%. They claim to have regained control over electricity prices and will now base increases on the cost of production, nuclear energy, and the overall network, rather than fossil fuel costs. They mention a successful negotiation at the European level regarding the electricity market and another negotiation with EDF to provide French citizens with access to the real cost of nuclear energy. They conclude by stating that future increases will be in line with the cost of the electrical system and inflation, without reaching double digits.

The speaker criticizes the European Commission, calling them "Talibans of the law" and "dogmatic extremists" on competition policy. They argue that France should prioritize its national interest and keep its dams, dismissing any interference from the Commission. When asked about the queen, the speaker suggests removing her, questioning the Commission's authority and dismissing any potential consequences. They emphasize the need to protect France's national interest and oppose any infringements. The speaker concludes by urging moderation and calm in the face of excesses.