Here are the views of Anne Lauvergeon, former CEO of Areva:
Anne Lauvergeon and Areva's present crisis
Anne Lauvergeon, about Areva’s crisis: “I have got my share of responsibility”
 |
| Les Échos |
After Areva’s sky-rocketing losses, Anne
Lauvergeon criticizes some kind of “untruth”. She
highlights the State’s obligations, then Fukushima consequences and unveils
details about the mining division.
Last year, Areva
recorded nearly a €5 billion loss. In what way are you responsible of this?
Four years ago, I left Areva after two
mandates. As everyone, I was surprised and
shocked, mainly because all financial analysts following Areva were
recommending it as an investment, before November 2014 profit warning. Having
spent ten years at the head of a group, I have compulsorily a share of
responsibility and I am still linked to this company and to its staff. But I
can’t bear anymore the kind of untruth, which are leaking here and there.
Areva : History
Nevertheless,
Areva’s history is the same as yours?
In 2001, Areva was registered, following
the common political expectations of a right-wing president and a left-wing
government, including environmentalists. The
public authorities were aware that it was high time to stop the dissentions
between Cogema and Framatome and that it was time to integrate these companies. This
model has been deemed relevant, as Rosatom, in Russia, has subscribed to the
same strategy. The president and the government agreed
on the fact that a €3 billion increase in capital was necessary to redeploy
Areva’s industrial capabilities, which dated back from the seventies. But I
regret that the increase in capital has been postponed many times. Only in
2010 the group was able to rise €910 million. It
should have been enough. But there were two upheavals. First
an energy crisis happened in Europe, whose consequences are as follows: Alstom
was compelled to sell its energy division to General Electric, GDF Suez
recorded some €15 billion depreciations in 2013 and the German operators were doing
badly. Then Fukushima changed the nuclear
landscape.
But Fukushima
did not weaken all the nuclear operators to such this extent…
The other operators of this field are
either conglomerates working in many fields like General Electric, Hitachi or
Mitsubishi, or companies associated with a central
state, like in China or in Russia. In the view to reduce Areva’s
sensitivity in case of a nuclear accident, we diversified its activities. But the
State requested to sell a third of our turnover by transferring Areva T&D
in 2010 (activity of power distribution). Refocusing Areva on nuclear was a
political decision.
 |
| Le Monde.fr |
Thus, the blame
is on the State acting as a shareholder?
The State played its part well in the
Supervisory Board I knew. Nevertheless, the State took time to
award Areva the necessary means to face international competition.
The Financial
Authority has criticized the conditions of the Finland EPR, OL3. And all major
projects come from….
The spokesman criticized many points! The
Finland EPR will cost three times its initial price. Like
this one built by EDF in Flamanville. Construction costs have increased everywhere
in the world, because of the rise of steel and concrete price. Many
major and complex projects costs have soared sharply, for instance in
aeronautics with the A380 or the B777-X, as well as have done the major
architectural projects: The Paris Philharmonie budget has
tripled. In Finland, we have sent our best
elements, like Philippe Knoche, who has been responsible for the construction. We have
got a client who has refused any “change order”. An
arbitration case is pending.
 |
| Lepoint.fr |
But the EPR is
considered as your creation?
The EPR was born in 1991, ten years
before my arrival (at the head of Areva), coming from a German-French political
and industrial will, involving Framatome and Siemens, then the power operators
and the safety agencies. The European customers wanted this huge
third generation reactor. I arrived in a company where the EPR was
already designed. Then, the Atmea reactor is my creation: that’s a
1,000 Megawatt reactor, designed jointly with Mitsubishi. In
2012, Turkey bought four reactors, such heralding the first significant order
registered after Fukushima.
 |
| Lefigaro.fr |
A preliminary
investigation has been launched about Uramin’s acquisition conditions. Do you acknowledge a kind of
strategic mistake?
In 2007, we owned several mines in
Canada close to their end of life, then there were some geopolitical risks in
Niger and finally, we faced a buoyant demand from our customers, mainly from
China. We implemented an organic growth in
Kazakhstan and Mongolia. But it was not enough. Everybody
buying raw materials in the first semester of 2007 paid more than in 2009:
nobody forecast the subprime crisis. After Fukushima, 10% of the world demand
disappeared, which justified the mothballing of some mining projects and as
such, the recording of some depreciations – I would have done the same. There
is uranium in Uramin. Even there are 9,000 tons more than
previously expected. Look at Areva’s reference documents
published these last three years: you will find the amounts of the first
two deposits. About the South African deposit: it was
sold for the pathetic amount of USD5 million to Australia’s Peninsula in late
2013, who has found since then 25,000 tons of uranium, featuring operating
costs lower than the present spot market price.
Shall Areva be
divided?
Aggregating, dividing then aggregating: business
bankers are fond of this. But today, Framatome would be dead if
the company were left alone: Framatome did not get the means to
finance alone the opening costs of the third generation, and facing world
competition, it has been able to take profit of the profitability given by
Cogema in the fuel cycle. The best solution would be a joint work
between EDF, GDF Suez and Areva. Today, all conditions seem advocating
this solution.
The nuclear
“business model” is not yet dead, so?
No, the nuclear sector is not yet dead. This
topic will be discussed during the COP 21 conference in Paris. I used
to say that nuclear power is not the ultimate solution, but there is no
solution without the nuclear sector. Moreover, let’s stop the “French
bashing”. We can scratch the sores until the end
of times, but Areva is still a world champion. But now
the new nuclear sector mainly needs state financing. Our
main competitors have got such financing, on the contrary of Areva. That’s
a major challenge for France and all infrastructure industries.
Véronique Le Billon, Les Echos
David Barroux, Les Echos
Going further...
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire