 I leave the floor to Xavier Plouquin, he will give us the view on this issue of energy and environment and sustainable development. The point of view of the financial of the financial institution is investment director and chief of staff to the CEO of Meridiam which is an investment company specializing in sustainable infrastructure. So, seven minutes no more. So, hi everyone, I also have a presentation that's way too long so the good news is that I can pick and choose and I will actually talk just a little about financing because I had my advertising page about investment in the battery giga factories but I had a quite long introduction that actually echoes I think a little maybe in a biased way the speech of my neighbor because I wanted to start and to have a focus on my view because Meridiam is a global infra fund developing long term infrastructure. I personally also used to be energy advisor for the French Ministry of Energy and I had to plan energy in France so I wanted to share a view that led in the end to the financing part but since I will make it short I will try to just maybe share something about what I think is interesting for European strategy for climate adaptation and mitigation betting on resilience, adaptation and sovereignty. The two first words being words that you don't hear everywhere and the third one that we use not to hear but that we hear now, the presentation is coming back. So maybe just the first point is that in my view and I agree with what you said Europe is actually the part of the world that's benefiting the most from the energy transition. Why? Because I think everything has been stated and explained in the other presentation. There is a lot of text so maybe if we focus just on the big blocks just to remember that Europe imports massive amount of oil, gas and coal, 93 percent of our oil, 89 percent of gas, 25 percent of coal and it's not going to increase. We are fully dependent on all the raw materials, lithium, 100 percent, cobalt, 81, nickel, uranium and in addition to that it is very concentrated. The third point is that we have some manufacturing capacities and we have important one in heat pump for instance. We are global leaders. We are still leaders in wind. Also the position is challenged. We are tech leaders in H2 even though the production is starting to grow in China and we are leader in nuclear even though our industry had some difficulties and there are no recovering. But some important parts of the value chain are missing, battery manufacturing as I said we have invested so I hope it will change and PV production which is close to zero. Let's not talk about food because I want to talk about food but I have cut the slides. Maybe there are just some elements that are important but everything has been said already. Stated policy scenario from the International Energy Agency, oil keeps approximately at 100 million barrels per day so it means it will remain a big commodity, it will remain something with price volatility and something that has an impact on our global balance. But what you can see on the right is that developed countries should reduce their consumption and they are supposed to. Maybe we will grow other kind of dependency. We have not talked about hydrogen today actually because it is still something that is kind of science fiction but if you project over 30 years European Union is supposed to be completely different from the rest of the world importing mass of hydrogen according to the IEA. Will it happen? Will it not? Anyway just a substitution from a dependency to another one. And what's interesting is that in Europe, this is about metal but I think we have all understood that we are basically fully dependent, that the dependency will grow, we will need to expand the importation of lithium by like 18 times before 2030 and 50 times by 2050 so it is huge amounts. This is about PV, I will skip also. And I think we have seen nearly exactly the same chart Olivier but yours one about inflation. This one is about the share of the GDP that has been used for energy and what you can see is that we are exactly in the same situation as it was in the first two energy crisis which is very huge and what happened in Europe is that we have completely socialized this with a tariff shield that increased the debt in France for instance 2.5 points which means that this is something that has a huge impact on our capacity to develop in the future. So the consequence of the first part of my presentation was to state that and I agree with you. When we think about energy transition it's something that benefits Europe the most because we are by far the most dependent part of the world. Many parts are dependent on energy imports but we have the largest share for the moment I think. What's interesting is that European countries could be considered rich enough to transition and that's also the reason why they can push for that but the weight of the transition is actually waiting very much on the households in Europe and they have trouble facing that. This chart is just to mention that if we want to target net zero and not stated policy we have to find approximately one trillion euros in advanced economies to invest starting in the next three years so it is huge. And what's interesting is that over the long term the total energy cost of a net zero scenario is supposed to be lower than something that's the stated policy but the problem is that it requires massive investment. So that's why in the end I was supposed to talk about investment funds. And what everything should have in mind because I think that in these chambers we do not talk about households we do not talk about the people enough that a study has been done in France about the cost of house renovation or about EV electric vehicle acquisition when you once you take off the subsidies how many years of salary it costs to an household. So the households are from left to right from the first decide meaning the 10 percent less rich on the right the 10 percent more rich. And what you can see is that basically a complete renovation of your household if you're in the 50 percent less rich people in France in France after subsidies that can go up to 70 percent of the cost still will cost you approximately two years of salary which is something that you cannot afford and the return on your investment is not enough or you need to have like very long term debt. It is a bit better on electric vehicle but what is important to understand is that European households even though they are supposed to afford and to desire climate mitigation do not find the value today and frankly even though you think it is a religion I think that most of the European household they do not really care enough about climate mitigation to spend two three five years of salary to renovate their house if they are told that it is for climate reasons. I think that European households they are not ready to pay let's say five years of not ready. No I think they are not at all and bad news. So this is about hydrogen but that's a figure. Bad news you could think that debt was a good way to up from the capex and pay over time. But this graph I think is one of the most insightful ones I've seen in years. So even if it's about hydrogen it's why I've put that here. In two thousand twenty one if the cost base for a hydrogen project was one hundred percent in two thousand twenty three it's one hundred and fifty percent much most part of the increasing cost is the cost of capital cost of debt as exploded debt is less available and it's the same for every part of the energy transition. So the households that could finance their innovation by having 30 years debt at zero percent cannot anymore and this is and this will have a huge impact on European households. So I will just use two slides and nearly not talk about financing. My conclusion about the European households is that the new solutions the green new solutions are more costly than they they're supposed to because even if they are less costly than fossil fuel solutions they are not when you compare to the fact that people are already equipped with existing fossil solutions. So they need not only to invest new capex but to write down basically the one that they previously had and people know that and solutions that rely on let's say carbon taxation they don't have the right time pace because you change your car every 10 years you renovate your house every 20 or 30 years but you pay your bill every month. So this is not an incentive that people are ready to accept green solutions even in Europe are not perceived that good ones because sometimes they are too expensive you know just the same thing more expensive. Sometimes it less it's more expensive and you have doubt about the fact that it works. There is a huge debate in France in Germany about heat pumps do it pumps really work when it's minus five degrees and this is really hard to target and it is not geopolitical high level discussion but it's something that basically prevents people from buying heat pumps instead of I don't know gas boiler and third sometimes the solution are expensive and they do not give the same service electric vehicle for instance they do not have the same capacity as a regular gasoline car. So it is very hard to convince people and they perceive that the value is outside in Europe that perceive that if they buy PV they buy Chinese thing if they buy EV they buy it's often Chinese basically they buy foreign products and that does not create jobs and it creates dependency and finally as I said the financing capacity is completely down at the moment because the debt is higher inflation has struck and in Europe people need most of their cash to buy expensive housing expensive studies in some countries so they don't have that much room for additional expenses. Would you conclude the conclusion one minute about this part and it's in one minute was that I think that a good way of probably discussing energy transition and it will involve also the southern countries is to focus on resilience adaptation and sovereignty IPCC for instance show the graph that's the most interesting graph I thought we will not detail it is one of the fact that's most of the climate adaptation strategies they also have benefit on mitigation people are ready to accept adaptation measures because it will give them more value for money it will protect them from each wave it will protect them for lack of energy for a great dependency they will be ready to pay maybe western countries should be able to focus on this kind of strategy that give basically the household's value for money and to discuss with other countries how to phase out the more polluting fossil fuel but not be completely focused on mitigation because I think it's not acceptable in western parts of the world either at the moment and I have not had the time to talk about Gigafactories of battery but I can around the cocktail if you want. Okay thank you you are I fully support what you said about adaptation in I remind you that in Kyoto protocol adaptation and mitigation retreat retreated the same way but unfortunately unfortunately cop after cop adaptation totally disappeared it came back recently and I think it will be very important for cop 28 to increase the consciousness and the consciousness on adaptation.