Iberdrola, Endesa propose review of Spain's nuclear phase-out calendar
The proposal was not endorsed by all the companies with stakes in Spain's nuclear fleet: Naturgy (NTGY.MC), opens new tab and EDP (EDP.LS), opens new tab did not sign it, the spokesperson said.
The proposal links the extension to a revision of the tax framework and, as such, isn't in line with the conditions set by Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez to open a discussion over the review, namely that it guarantees security of supply, safety and it doesn't weigh on taxpayers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
5 minutes ago
- The Guardian
EU-US tariffs: five key takeaways from the trade deal
Donald Trump has announced a deal with the EU imposing tariffs of 15% on most goods entering the US from Europe and requiring the bloc to make huge investments in US energy products, averting a trade war between the two of the world's largest economies. Though the 15% rate is half of what Trump had threatened, many will be disappointed by it. When the UK accepted tariffs of 10% in its trade deal with the US in May, it was widely reported that European leaders considered it to be a bad deal. Brussels also agreed to buy, over three years, $750bn (£560bn) worth of oil, gas, nuclear fuel and semi-conductors, including liquified gas, while at the same time agreeing to invest $600bn (£446bn) in the US, including purchases of military equipment, according to Trump. One analyst suggested the deal was a 'big win' for the US president while it was less clear what the EU gained. 'A 15% tariff on European goods, forced purchases of US energy and military equipment and zero tariff retaliation by Europe, that's not negotiation, that's art of the deal.,' Prashant Newnaha, senior Asia-Pacific rates strategist at TD securities said. Here are five key takeaways: The US will keep in place a 50% tariff on steel and aluminium according to Trump, although European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said the tariffs on steel could be replaced with a quota system with further negotiation. There was also confusion over pharmaceuticals after Trump said the sector would not be included, however a senior US official later confirmed that they were in fact covered by the 15% tariff. According to von der Leyen, zero tariffs will apply to a range of sectors including 'all aircraft and component parts, certain chemicals, certain generics, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, natural resources and critical raw materials'. But there was ongoing uncertainty for some industries – Sunday's announcement did not clear up what tariffs European wine and spirits producers will face in the US. Carsten Nickel, deputy director of research at Teneo, said Sunday's accord was 'merely a high-level, political agreement' that could not replace a carefully hammered out trade deal: 'This, in turn, creates the risk of different interpretations along the way, as seen immediately after the conclusion of the US-Japan deal.' On Sunday, a senior US administration official told reporters in Washington that Trump retained the ability to increase the tariffs in the future if European countries do not live up to the investment commitments contained in the deal. The deal creates a division on the island of Ireland, as traders in Northern Ireland can sell into the US on a 10% tariff rate, courtesy of the UK deal, while their neighbours in Ireland will be hit with the 15% rate. The disparity will make for difficult diplomatic conversations over guarantees to maintain stability on the entire island in the Good Friday agreement, which had already been rocked by the fallout from Brexit, when customs arrangements involving Northern Ireland became a huge headache for EU and UK negotiators. Ireland's deputy prime minister, Simon Harris, said he 'regretted' the 15% tariff rate but said 'certainty' was important. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the deal, saying it averted a trade conflict that would have hit Germany's export-driven economy and its large auto sector. German carmakers, VW, Mercedes and BMW were some of the hardest hit by the 27.5% US tariff on car and parts imports now in place. But the powerful BDI federation of industrial groups was vocal in its disappointment. 'Even a 15% tariff rate will have immense negative effects on export-oriented German industry,' said Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the federation's leadership. The country's VCI chemical trade association said the accord left rates 'too high'. The impact of the tariffs is likely to be substantial on some companies; automaker Volkswagen said it suffered a 1.3bn euro ($1.5bn) hit to profit in the first half of the year from the higher tariffs. Though von der Leyen framed the agreement as a 'good deal' that would bring 'stability' and 'predictability', Brussels' original aim in the talks was for a 'zero-for-zero' tariff deal and tariffs remain far higher than historically. 'The crippling uncertainty is largely over, the deal is bearable for the EU,' said Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank. 'Trump can claim that the asymmetric deal is a 'win' for him. But of course, the outcome is still bad relative to the situation that prevailed before Trump started his trade wars.' US consumers are also likely to bear the costs of tariffs as companies pass on the expense in increased prices, many economists have warned. With agencies
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
EU's pledge for $250 billion of US energy imports is delusional
LAUNCESTON, Australia, July 28 (Reuters) - There are strong echoes of Donald Trump's failed trade deal with China from his first term as U.S. president in the framework agreement reached with the European Union. Trump and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal for a 15% tariff on U.S. imports of EU goods at the U.S. leader's golf course in Scotland on Sunday. But more important than the 15% tariff rate was the apparent commitment by the EU to massively ramp up energy imports from the United States. The agreement calls for EU imports of U.S. energy, which currently are mainly crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG), of $250 billion a year for three years. This is a delusional level of imports that the EU has virtually no chance of meeting, and one that U.S. producers would also struggle to supply. Even if the EU did manage somehow to boost its energy imports from the United States to the $250 billion a year mark, it would also prove massively disruptive for energy flows around the rest of the world. The numbers show the scale of the challenge. The 28 members of the EU imported 3.38 billion barrels of seaborne crude oil in 2024, according to data compiled by energy analysts Kpler. Assuming the 2025 volume stays the same and the price paid per barrel averages around $70, this means the EU will pay about $236.6 billion for its crude. The EU's imports from the United States were 573 million barrels in 2024, which if replicated this year would be valued at around $40.1 billion. For LNG, the EU imported 82.68 million metric tons in 2024, which would have cost around $51.26 billion assuming an average price of around $12 per million British thermal units (mmBtu). Imports of the super-chilled fuel from the United States were 35.13 million tons in 2024, worth about $21.78 billion. The EU also buys coal from the United States, the bulk being higher-value metallurgical coal used to make steel. Total EU imports of metallurgical coal in 2024 were worth $6.72 billion, assuming an average price of $200 per ton, with those from the United States valued at $2.67 billion. Putting together the value of EU imports of U.S. crude oil, LNG and metallurgical coal gives a 2024 total of around $64.55 billion. This is about 26% of the $250 billion the EU is supposed to spend on U.S. energy a year under the framework agreement. If the EU did ramp up its imports of U.S. crude, LNG and metallurgical coal to $250 billion, it would account for 85% of its total spending on those energy commodities. The United States exported 1.45 billion barrels of crude in 2024, according to Kpler, which would be worth $101.5 billion at a price of $70 a barrel. U.S. shipments of LNG were 87.05 million tons in 2024, which would be worth about $54 billion at an average price of $12 per mmBtu. The U.S. exported 51.53 million tons of metallurgical coal in 2024, worth $10.3 billion at an average price of $200 a ton. Putting together the value of all three energy commodities gives a total of $165.8 billion, meaning that even if the EU bought the entire volume it would still fall well short of the $250 billion. The scale of the delusion probably exceeds what Trump and China agreed in their so-called Phase 1 trade deal in December 2019, under which China was supposed to buy $200 billion of additional U.S. energy by the end of 2021. The reality is that China never even came close to buying that level, and its imports of U.S. energy didn't even reach what they were before Trump launched his first trade war in 2017. There are a few caveats when looking at the framework agreement between Trump and Von der Leyen. The first is that not all the details are known and the $250 billion of energy is also said to include nuclear fuel, although this will only be a small value even if included. The second is the deal will probably include refined fuels, with U.S. exports to the EU of products such as diesel, being almost 110 million barrels in 2024, worth about $10.9 billion assuming a price of $100 a barrel. But it's still clear that the commitment to buy $250 billion in U.S. energy is completely unrealistic and unachievable. The smart people in the room must know this, begging the question as to why agree to what is obviously a ridiculous number? What happens when the inevitable failure is realised? Perhaps the EU is hoping for the same outcome as China did with the first trade war with Trump in 2019. Run down the clock, talk nice, and hope the next U.S. president is easier to deal with. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab. The views expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Schoolboy, 17, investigated on suspicion of using AI to make deepfake nudes of his female classmates
A 17-year-old schoolboy in Spain is under investigation after allegedly using artificial intelligence to create deepfake nude images of his female classmates, which he is suspected of selling online. The investigation began after 16 young women, all students at an educational institute in Valencia, southeastern Spain, reported disturbing incidents of AI-generated sexual images of themselves circulating on social media. The images showed the minors naked and were allegedly being sold to others. The first complaint was lodged in December, when a teenage girl informed police that an account had been created under her name, with AI-generated videos and images depicting her in a compromising position. 'Photos of various people, all of them minors, appeared on this account. All these photos had been modified from the originals, which had been manipulated so that the people in them appeared completely naked,' the Spanish Civil Guard said in a statement. The suspect, a 17-year-old boy, is now facing investigation for the alleged corruption of minors. Authorities are continuing to gather evidence to determine whether he is responsible for creating and distributing the explicit images. This alarming case comes at a time when AI-driven sexual exploitation is on the rise, particularly among minors. Spain is no stranger to this phenomenon. In 2023, a similar case in Extremadura saw 15 minors investigated for using AI to create explicit images of their female schoolmates. The offenders were later sentenced to probation. The deepfake issue is not confined to Spain. Celebrities around the world, including pop stars like Taylor Swift and politicians like US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have fallen victim to AI-generated pornography. In the UK, more than 250 British celebrities were targeted by a Channel 4 investigation that exposed how their faces were superimposed onto explicit videos using AI. Although the Spanish government pledged in March 2023 to introduce laws to criminalise the creation of AI-generated sexual content without consent, the bill has yet to be passed by parliament. Currently, cases like these often fall into legal limbo, with existing laws not explicitly addressing the issue of AI-manipulated imagery. In the UK, however, the Online Safety Act 2023 has criminalised the sharing of explicit deepfake content without consent. Offenders who create or share such material maliciously now face criminal charges, with the possibility of imprisonment and unlimited fines. 'It is unacceptable that one in three women have been victims of online abuse. This demeaning and disgusting form of chauvinism must not become normalised,' said Victims Minister Alex Davies-Jones. 'We are bearing down on violence against women – whatever form it takes.' Baroness Jones, the UK's Technology Minister, also condemned the rise in intimate image abuse, saying: 'The rise of intimate image abuse is a horrifying trend that exploits victims and perpetuates a toxic online culture. 'These acts are not just cowardly, they are deeply damaging, particularly for women and girls who are disproportionately targeted.' The rapid development of AI technology has made it easier than ever for perpetrators to create and distribute explicit images without the knowledge or consent of the victims. With new cases emerging, there are growing calls for stricter legislation worldwide to keep pace with this emerging threat. Tech companies are also under increasing pressure to remove deepfake content from their platforms and take stronger measures to prevent its creation and distribution.
