Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the press conference of PGE, the Polish Energy Group, to sum up our financial and operating results of Q3 2025. We have VP for Operations, Maciej Górski, VP for Financial Matters, Mister Jastrzębski, and Head of Finance, Piotr Sudoł. Traditionally, as always, we will start with the presentation, and after that, there will be time for questions. Now, over to VP Maciej Górski. Good morning, everyone. As every quarter, it is a pleasure to have you. I would like to especially welcome representatives of our main shareholder. Good morning. You might have had a chance to read our report for Q3. It has been published, and we announced it yesterday. Results for Q3, when it comes to our operations and financials, are quite close to what we estimated a dozen or so days ago. Let me just give you a brief overview. In Q3 2025, apart from the fact that we posted good results when it comes to EBITDA, repeatable EBITDA, PLN 3 billion, which is 20% growth compared to the previous year. What is really important, we have managed to achieve very good results in terms of CapEx. We have spent nearly PLN 2.7 billion, which is an increase of 3% year- on- year. When it comes to our operations, we will also mention CapEx, our strategy from June 2025 has just amplified the fact that CapEx is really the apple of our eye. There is a lot of organizational effort that we put into making sure that everything that is linked to our growth, to our development, should be done as efficiently as possible. When it comes to heat and electricity, our results are similar to last year. There is 0.6 TW -hour, which is a very small variance. When it comes to heat, again, it is a very, very small variance, practically bordering on statistical error. What was important in Q3? Definitely, there was a supplementary auction. 2.6 GW has been contracted. This is an important revenue item in our results. When it comes to investment projects, and I will mention it in a moment, but the most spectacular ones is a tender procedure for new gas units, Gryfino and Rybnik. In both locations, we want to add to what already exists. There is a CCGT planned in Gryfino and in Rybnik. There is one being built. Those tender procedures are ongoing. We need to learn and evaluate bids between the main auction that is planned for December. There was also a tender for a storage facility in Gryfino. Probably you've been following that. As PGE, we are trying to focus on the largest warehousing, the largest storage project. 400 MW, 800 MW-hours. I mean, these are one of the largest facilities that will be happening in Poland. We are very happy because we have received three bids. It is a competitive procedure. Actually, companies are interested in bidding for us, in working with us. When it comes to projects that have been finalized, five gas engines in Bydgoszcz. Maybe not a huge success in terms of installed capacity, but when it comes to decarbonization and transformation, energy transformation process, it is a contribution. Projects like this one definitely show that this business line, where we're going to spend around PLN 15 billion, this business line is moving, and we're doing all kinds of projects, including small projects. Now, on this slide, you can see our key projects, our key initiatives. Good news, very good news, is that our flagship projects for when it comes to renewables, Baltica two, this project is happening according to schedule, on budget. Last time that we met, we were mentioning that we had a partner who had some challenges at that point. Ørsted was actually during their issuance campaign, but now they've done it, and they are trying to curb their exposure to new projects, and they only focus on projects that are ongoing, that are in progress. Actually, Baltica two is something that they describe as a really important project in their portfolio. We are very happy to be fulfilling our priorities onshore. We're building a station while Ørsted started working offshore, and we're preparing seabed for cables, for foundations, and we've managed to achieve some tangible results, tangible successes between the sea and land. They had some challenges with drilling. On our side, it went very well. I need to mention Janicki, which is a Polish company from the region of Silesia, and they are a great example of fantastic local content that's been helping us with that part of the project. I was actually there in person. It looks very impressive. There is a distance of around 100 meters from the shore, and that's where there is a device, some set of equipment that's doing some guided drilling, and then cables appear somewhere 1.2 km away from that particular spot already on the seabed. It is looking really, really impressive, all the work that's being done there. When we're talking about Baltica two, there is something else that's very interesting, and probably you've noticed it, especially that it's been in the public domain, namely local content. We, as PGE, together with Ørsted, we're working on making sure that dialogue with Polish subcontractors be maintained. I myself went to Żary recently, and I met with Smulders. They actually work for us. They also do a project for Polenergia, and their work involves special platforms made of secondary steel. If you have a chance to visit a manufacturer like this, really take this opportunity. They have 500 people when it comes to permanent personnel, and there's 200 additional people working for offshore energy. They were called Spomasz. Today, they're called Smulders, and they are a great example of local content, the Polish supply chain working for the offshore energy sector. As I talked to them, I learned that they were creating their own supply chain among Polish companies. They are a subcontractor working with many partners. I say that local content in offshore is something that we are very much doing. We also have a project in Rybnik, CCGT in Rybnik, done by Polimex. Work is actually progressing. It is quite advanced. We started already transferring and transferring power. When it comes to Żarnowiec, we formally started the construction of the largest storage facility, 981 MW-hours. We already have a permit to install the cable to take off the power. We are working with LG very closely, and we are keeping our fingers crossed for them as they are relocating their production capabilities. When it comes to heat, we are doing a project in Kraków, a very nice project, a large one, 100 megawatts in gas. We have signed a contract with a contractor, and there is another small project, but there's a lot about it in the media, which is a heat facility in Gryfino. There is a contract already signed, and it stipulates that by the time we shut down the last two units at Dolna Odra, we'll have a new heat source ready. This project is ongoing. It's happening on schedule, and it will be launched in Q3 next year. When it comes to distribution, we spent most of our money in distribution on a variety of initiatives and tasks. We're connecting, of course, new off-takers. Each new off-taker is like PLN 19,000, so it's not a lot per off-taker, but we're also cabling our network. We have another section of 165 km in the previous quarter, and we're installing remote readers, remote meters. We installed 186,000 such meters in Q3. These projects are really interesting because they help us enhance and strengthen our network, more cables, then, of course, better quality of our performance. Of course, we have to take into account landscape, right? Our cable lines are not disfiguring local landscapes, which is really important for those communities who live there. Of course, when we're talking about remote meters, this is really important. It's a big step towards digitizing our capabilities so that we can be more efficient and more flexible in our operations. If you follow what Grzegorz Michałowski says publicly, every single operator has more and more significance for our stability. There are parameters like what percentage of our distribution or transmission is happening via which network. Actually, 90% went through PSE until recently, but currently, there are more and more local sources. The share of power that goes through the transmission network falls to 40%. Our networks, our capabilities sort of start taking over, which goes to show how important our investments are in terms of modernizing our network, in terms of modernizing our substations. Now let me tell you briefly about our revenue side. As I said before, electricity consumption fell by 0.7 TW-hour, and we can see already in the first month of Q4 that the rebound that happened in September is continuing. As we are looking at macroeconomic indicators, everything is speeding up. Our local consumption goes up with it. Actually, we have a situation, we have a reversal of what was happening in Q1 because our neighbors witnessed falling prices of gas. Cheaper energy appeared, and we could import it. We had a little bit less production on our side, like 1.75 TW-hour, and then the situation sort of reversed, and we imported over 1 TW-hour more compared to the previous year. There was a certain trend, then it reversed. That was about volumes. When it comes to prices during Q3, we had a bit of a peak, but it was small, somewhere between PLN 410-PLN 430 per MW-hour because, you know, the average price is at the level of PLN 424. In Q3, unfortunately, CO2 increased from EUR 70 to somewhere around EUR 80 per ton. There was EUR 70 in July and around EUR 80 per ton in September. Our margins when it comes to coal-fired units went down. On the other hand, we had a favorable situation where margins grew with our gas units, especially Gryfino and Dolna Odra were involved. When it comes to, actually, let me go back because there was something about Q2, negative prices, and it was widely commented in the public domain. I mean, the weather was not what we expected, especially July. It was not as productive in terms of PV, and there was less wind due to seasonality. Also, the weather in general was not what we expected. Indeed, we had some what we call negative hours, and there were fewer of them than we expected. Now a brief summary of what I already mentioned. Probably this slide is something that you've seen, or these numbers are something that you've seen. We had higher production in Dolna Odra and less production in lignite-fired units. We fell from 13.2 to somewhere at the level of 12.5. There is a stable in terms of distribution, it is quite stable. Sales towards final off-takers a little bit less, especially when we are talking about BNC tariffs. When it comes to heat, the situation was influenced by the temperature because the temperature was, average temperature was lower by 0.3 degree Celsius compared to the previous year. This is it when it comes to our operating results and investments. Now over to my colleague Przemysław. Thank you. Again, let me give you some analytical data around our EBITDA in Q3. EBITDA, as it has been mentioned before, in Q3 this year is nearly PLN 3 billion, which constitutes a growth of around 20% year- on- year. In this quarter, in the quarter that we're discussing, for the first time in the whole year, we saw a lower margin in segments that were based on conventional sources, around PLN 380 million. That's the amount we're talking about. Why? Mostly because margin was lower on coal and lignite, what we generated based on coal and lignite. There was less demand on power, higher imports, and lower prices. Basically, revenue was lower by around PLN 1.5 billion. This was due to lower prices, PLN 90 pe -hour. It was a negative change. It was a drop. Our sales volume also fell by 0.7 TW-hour. These were the main factors that contributed to the change that I'm talking about, the change in revenue. It has been compensated partially by lower CO2 costs. That was around PLN 1 billion, or that's around PLN 500 million, and lower costs of fuel around PLN 100 million. Basically, the change that I'm talking about is negative. We could see lower margin in coal-based production, gas, and especially Gryfino, but also heat were doing well. A big and important source of revenue are all kinds of market mechanisms, the balancing mechanisms. In Q3, we noted an increase of total margin by PLN 166 million year on year. There is additional revenue coming from supplementary auctions for the second half of 2025. However, in Q3 2025, there was a decrease of revenue from the balancing market. When it comes to electricity and sales to end off-takers, final off-takers, we had a lower base, and we were trying to catch up after what happened with Tariff G in the second half of 2024. When it comes to other elements of our EBITDA, this is a positive result on our distribution activities. PGE Dystrybucja is plus PLN 104 million, and Energetyka Kolejowa, so the railway part, it's also several million Polish złoty. Also, we had a higher balance of a provision that was dissolved from Q3 2024. We're talking about PLN 110 million. All the other factors are not really material or significant, so I will skip them. When it comes to CapEx in Q3 2025, as it's been mentioned, we've seen an increase. The largest increase in spending, and probably it's not a surprise for you, was happened in renewables. It's over PLN 980 million more. And here we're mostly talking about Baltica 2. We spent on delivery and installing of the foundations, and we had onshore and offshore substations installed. When it comes to heat production, there was an increase by PLN 182 million. We spent more on Gdynia and Czechnica. In distribution, our growth was PLN 44 million, and this was mostly because we connected new off-takers, and we spent money on remote meters and cabling work. There was a drop of over PLN 840 million, and it happened in gas. It comes from the fact that the projects that we are doing currently simply have very specific schedules. For example, in Rybnik, work is quite advanced already at this point, and there was quite a lot of spend in Gryfino, Dolna Odra. The base was really, really very high to begin with. When it comes to railways, we have a drop, but it is a very special area. We do not fully control the spend schedule. We are, in a way, dependent on what the railway company TLK is doing. They are modernizing their systems and building new substations. That is the result. When it comes to coal, and we've been stressing this a few times already, it is our policy to be very disciplined in terms of spending. We spent mostly on maintenance, and the decrease that we noted in Q3 2025 is actually proof that this policy is working and that we're doing it consistently. Actually, we spent nearly PLN 260 million more compared to Q3 2024. That is the direction that we're going to maintain. The dynamic will grow simply because it's aligned with the strategy that we announced in June. Now let's talk about net debt. As of the end of Q3, it was PLN 400 million, and it was PLN 9.1 billion less than at the end of 2024. Our net debt was mostly shaped by the fact that EBITDA was PLN 10.6 billion, so it contributed to less debt. There was a change of PLN 4.8 billion due to CO2 settlements and clearing of CO2 contracts. Again, lower debt. We spent PLN 7.2 billion, and that was investment, which increases our debt. Income tax, PLN 1.4 billion. Again, higher debt. There was a loan from the National Recovery Plan, PLN 2.3 billion. We talked about it during our last conference, and I remember analysts had a number of questions about it. This is, well, the difference between the amount that we received and fair value. When it comes to the future in Q4, we are due PLN 7.4 billion for CO2. Again, this indicates a certain direction in which our debt will go, or net debt will increase. When we take into account CO2 payments, our debt quarter to quarter will increase by around PLN 800 million. Our economic debt, as of the end of the quarter that we're discussing, is PLN 15.5 billion. Net debt to LTM EBITDA is 1.1. As we always do, at every conference, we're trying to tell you about our outlook for the coming future and how we feel our EBITDA will shape up. This is what we're doing on this slide. When it comes to renewables, we expect that EBITDA should fall, and it will be mostly impacted by less revenue from the balancing market. We'll see some negative impact from our revenue coming from green certificates. The price of these green certificates should change. When it comes to gas, we expect steady EBITDA that will be impacted by higher margin from energy, from the sales of energy, but will have less revenue from the balancing market. When it comes to coal, we are expecting a drop in EBITDA, mostly because margins on electricity should fall. I would say renewables will be growing, will be developing, which will have a negative impact on the use of our assets, especially conventional assets. There will be lower volumes produced through conventional assets, and there will be continued pressure on energy prices. Actually, coal will see lower EBITDA. In terms of heat, we expect steady EBITDA, and we expect that lower revenue from electricity will be compensated by lower cost of fuels and CO2 emission credits. We expect higher revenue coming from high-performance co-generation because ETA Technica will have had its full year of operations. We also have new assets in Bydgoszcz, plus new engines will be introduced to the Gdynia location. In terms of revenue from heat, we expect lower rates, lower electricity prices. In terms of distribution, we expect that our EBITDA will be stable, steady, but there's an asterisk in the sense that we're still discussing, and we're not sure about our WACC. We don't know what the regulator will dictate, which adds uncertainty. We're expecting stable EBITDA from distribution, but again, we don't know about the weighted average cost of capital WACC in next year. Our regulatory value of assets should increase. In terms of our railway segment, we expect stable EBITDA, but again, we don't know about WACC. This is key data for the next year that we don't have. In terms of trade, we have a higher base in 2025. We were trying to catch up after 2024. Because the base was high, if there's an adjustment, it could be negative. The following slide, which is an additional slide that we believe you should see. When we published our estimates, the media started picking it up and talking about lower net profit in Q3 that we estimated. The media were saying that the net profit was much lower than the market consensus. The market consensus is something that we do not have any control over. It is a group of analysts that come up with it. What we want to tell you now is how and why this difference appeared. When it comes to EBITDA, no one had any doubts. They reported EBITDA was well within the sort of consensus corridor. What about our net profit? Our revenue, financial revenue, and cost, the balance was PLN 0.7 billion negative, which, of course, influenced our net performance, our net result. It was impacted negatively by the valuation of derivatives, which are part of our CFD on Baltica two. Right now, we believe that the CFD, that this contract fulfills all the requirements for a subvention according to accounting standards. There were two instruments. There were two derivatives. Those derivatives are the result from the very CFD as a mechanism. Part of the CFD price can be set in EUR. There is an inflation index that is used to refer it to the Polish złoty, which means that on a regular basis, we need to evaluate those instruments. Of course, the values that we arrived at impact our net result. The parameters that have to be taken into account for those evaluations are outside of our control. Like, for example, euro to złoty exchange rate projection or expected inflation in the euro area and in Poland. These are parameters that we do not have any control over. What's really important is that those changes, those differences come from accounting operations, but this is strictly non-cash. As we're looking at CFD contracts, which are a way to fund our offshore projects long-term, there is still discussion ongoing between experts, renowned, reputable auditors. They discuss the international accounting standards, and certain things are not precisely described in said accounting standards. Maybe over time, there will be some new standards that will emerge telling us how to approach the matter. Maybe then the market and analysts will find it easier to plug that into their financial models. For now, the situation with international accounting standards is what it is. Hopefully, I've managed to explain the matter of net profit. This is it for now. Let us move on to the following part of our conversation. All right. Thank you, gentlemen. We have listened to questions, or we were looking at questions that were coming to us. We will actually ask two first questions ourselves because they come from among the most frequently asked questions coming from you. One question is about our projects like Gryfino and Rybnik gas units, as well as the energy as well as the storage faci lity. Where are we? What about selection of contractors and so on? Right. As I have mentioned before, when it comes to these three projects, everything is going on schedule according to plan. We are processing one of our gas units, both in Gryfino and Rybnik. We're processing it in such a way that we are going to get bids from contractors before the main auction. For now, as far as I remember, the bids are due by the 3rd of December, and we will see what we're going to get, but we're optimistic. We already went through dialogue. We received remarks to draft contracts that we prepared. We have reason to believe that potential contractors are interested in joining those projects, which makes us very happy. We are hoping that we will receive those bids. We know what's happening with turbines all around the world because gas turbines are a rare commodity these days. Production slots at Siemens Energy, at Mitsubishi Power, at GE, those slots are booked not only by European companies. We do know that Germany has very ambitious plans, increasingly ambitious plans to develop gas, but also the United States are in the picture. Gas turbines play a big role in the United States supporting their data centers that are very much driven by AI and the fact that AI is booming. Plus, there are so many projects, gas turbine and gas unit projects ongoing all around the world. These are all competitors. There is another paradox. There is one specific component of turbines, blades. There is a huge competition coming from aviation, civil aviation and military aviation. Again, it is a global trend that everyone is competing not only for turbines, but also blades. Turbine manufacturers have their capacity blocked for different competing projects all around the world. Their suppliers have their capacity blocked specifically for blades for all kinds of sectors all around the world. That is what is happening. The manufacturers of gas turbines, it is their time to shine, so to speak. Everyone envies them, and their production slots are really very hot. We are trying to be as transparent as possible in our processes, and we give bidders as much time as they need to prepare all the documents, to submit all the documents. I do feel that we are going to get bids that will allow us to participate in the auctions that I mentioned. What is special about all those different projects is that there are a lot of comments coming from turbine suppliers that Poland is special in terms of companies who can do EPC. Very often, they mention Polimex Mostostal. We, PGE, we have their shares, and we are doing big projects together. They have actually done Dolna Odra for us. They have done Rybnik for us, CCGT. They have done Czechnica. They have done Bydgoszcz for us. And they are participating in an offshore project as well. We do not only use their capabilities, but turbine suppliers notice that, and they say, "It is wonderful that Poland has companies, has players who can do EPC to such an extent." This is something good for us. This is something in our favor. Hopefully, we will have local content provided for. We will have a Polish designer, Polish contractor among those bids that will come to us, hopefully. We will see how things will go, and we will keep you informed. When it comes to our storage facility in Gryfino, we got three bids. As you may know, these bids are quite competitive. They're different because some of them are based on Korean technology. Something is based on Chinese technology, American technology. I would say the Chinese technology is, I would say, debatable or dubious. Again, it goes to show that there are Chinese companies that can participate in a public tender procedure. What I appreciate is in that all those bids, there are Polish contractors present, Polish companies that we've seen before, that we've done projects with before. We know that these are reputable players who deliver good quality on time and on budget. On the other hand, it shows that Polish companies are trying to learn. They are trying to learn the ropes and do very innovative projects in Poland. I mean, apart from Żarnowiec, no one has ever done anything the size of this. There has not been a storage facility this big. It is wonderful to see that there are consortium groups of Polish companies that can go for it. They can design and do such large projects in storage. Hopefully, we will select something from the bids that we have received. We do need a little bit of time to technically and economically evaluate the bids that we have received. All of them are above our budget, but we do have the right as the buyer to run our analysis and still choose one of these bi ds. Thank you. Thank you. The other topic that we would like to mention right now because it sparks interest, namely the efficiency team for improving the efficiency of shaping tariffs. This is an interesting question, I guess. Let us talk about it. This topic has been quite interesting, let's say, and popular. Just like we were saying during the presentation, I would like to mention that WACC for us in distribution is really a key component when it comes to how our EBITDA shapes up. We have been talking about it time and time again that distribution, the area of distribution, generates such high levels of EBITDA, which in turn translates into a very intensive investment process. It is no secret that distribution generally and the distribution network still require quite a lot of investment. We need to connect new sources, especially renewables. If these investments, if these projects were to slow down, then automatically the positive impact of them will stretch over time. The scale of possible connections will be lower. Undoubtedly, any movement on WACC will automatically be linked to EBITDA, and that will be linked to our investment plans. Secondly, when it comes to the team, it is too early to talk about how it will impact things. It's been just appointed. Of course, as much as we can, we will be participating in the workings of that team. Even look at different calendars. When we're talking about establishing WACC for the next year, we're talking about mid-December, while the team has just been established. It has to do some work. It has to come up with some analysis before it has an opinion. Probably these calendars will not coincide. We're talking, I guess, the first quarter at the earliest next year for the team to really come up with some concepts and ideas. Then we will be able to say more to whatever is suggested by the team and how it could impact our performance, especially in distribution. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think that now we've reached the point where we can allow questions from the room, but we do have some time restrictions. Please, maximum two questions per person. If we have time, we'll go for another round. Julia Cydejko, Polityka Insight. I have three questions, actually. We'll see how it will go. All these questions are about the new energy facilities. My question is, at what stage is Ostrów Wielkopolski? Will you be interested in repowering of wind farms or wind facilities in the coming years, especially that there are some legislative changes that may make it easier for you? My question is about storage for the distribution network and the pump storage Młote facility. There is this new draft of the GRID Act that talks about just one provision where distributors will be able to build and own storage facility. I wonder whether you're going to use that possibility when it comes. Right. I can select two out of three. I think you might have even asked four questions. When it comes to your first question, the Ostrów Wielkopolski facility, for sure, very much so. This project is being developed. From our point of view, this project really looks good. Nice, decent location where we have access to the gas network by gas system. We also have a way to take off power. We're working on this project. It's one of our priorities. As I said, we are trying to develop more and more gas projects. We have a dozen or so different locations where we could develop new gas sources. Indeed, Ostrów Wielkopolski is, I think it's really a good one because we can quite easily shape it and plan it based on Gryfino and based on Rybnik. I'm talking about CCGTs because we have had some idea that it could be a project that could be done as a simple cycle facility. Actually, based on progress in Ostrów, one could say clearly that this project will be, it is actually next in line after Gryfino and after Dolna Odra. That was your first question answered. Now, question two, repowering. Repowering is still something that we have to look at, that we have to monitor. In our fleet, we have 23 locations, 23 in terms of onshore wind. We have around 800 MW installed capacity, but some of these locations are older, I could say. On the one hand, we would like to take advantage of all those locations, of those assets as much as possible because if there is a turbine that's been installed, it would be good for it to pay itself off. We have an internal project that's all about identifying, designating locations that could be analyzed from the point of view of repowering. It is early days. This process is at its very early stages. If I were to say something today, repowering would not be a big driver or a big lever leading to higher capacity installed in onshore wind. Actually, a bigger driver to increase capacity in onshore wind would be through acquisitions. We are maintaining our ambition to indeed acquire other onshore wind projects at any stage of development. Of course, the later the stage of development or something that's operating, something that's operational, the better for us. We would be really comfortable. We don't have a problem to purchase an installation, an asset that's been operating for a few years because it's complementary to our existing fleet. We are in a privileged situation currently because we have the largest servicing and maintenance organizations for wind farms. We have nearly 200 people at work, which really leads to some cost advantage. This allows us to enjoy decent margins on this part of our business. The third question you asked was about storage. I'm not sure if it's such a great idea because I think that electricity or energy storage, to be efficient, to make sense, it has to have more than one reason to exist. Distribution and the distribution organization cannot engage in trade. I don't know how legislation would look at our revenue from system services, especially balancing related services. When we look at our utility scale storage facilities that are connected to mid-voltage or high voltage, we devote quite a lot of time and thought into bringing all these revenue streams together. It's really very difficult to get storage to make sense if you don't have three other revenue sources like capacity market, arbitrage, and system services. Of course, looking at how the capacity market develops, we see the derating factor and what's happening and how this revenue stream is actually eroding for every storage facility, any new storage facility. Still, we end up with two revenue streams that are intertwined or interdependent because they cannibalize one another. Still, there's a lot of revenue. There's a lot of margin there. From our point of view, commercial storage facilities, for sure, it's a way to go. That's what we want to explore with any available trusted technology. Having energy storage linked to distribution, one would have to really precisely know what the role is. Maybe they may make certain things more expensive, making distribution costs and transmission costs too high. We would have to get it back through tariffs. It could lead to some kind of inflation of our tariffs. The Młote facility definitely qualifies when it comes to what we can do. It is one of the best pump storage facilities that we have. Whenever we have good, favorable regulatory environment, I mean, awaiting favorable regulatory environment, we are continuing to spend money and time on this project. We would like to build the Młote facility, the pump storage Młote facility. If we can get some sort of a support system, especially that it cannot be financed from the existing capacity market, if we find support for it, we would like to build it. We are very happy that there are other storage pump projects in Poland. We can see that there are developers, players who are interested in such facilities. Hopefully, some new regulatory solutions will appear that will make it easier to do those projects. All right. There was another person who wanted to ask something. I have two questions. One is about distribution. There is this draft law from the president, and there are discussions with representatives of the president's administration. There were two arguments for the lowering of WACC. The first argument was that WACC does not take into account the influx of cheap money from Eastern Europe. Why is dividend for parent companies so high? Distribution paid like PLN 2 billion. This money does not stay in the group or in the companies. The other question is about tariff G. We have two tariffs that have been approved. They are around PLN 500, plus there is the trading fee. There is this idea from the government that such a fee could be introduced, and those tariffs would be at the level of PLN 500. These two things coming together, would it be satisfactory for you? Thank you. When it comes to, I will go back to something that I said before. Cheap money, influx of cheap money. We are talking about the national recovery plan and loans that have very, very favorable interest, like 0.5% on an annual basis, long-term loans. Very nice. Yes. We are looking at this as a whole, in totality. We have certain investment needs. We have to modernize our distribution network. We have to develop it, grow it further. For us, it is not either/or. It is not a substitute for WACC or for tariffs. Our policy is whatever we earn, we spend, we invest. Now moving to your question about the dividend. Basically, any dividends in our group that are paid, that's part of our way to manage our liquidity within the group. The money comes back to the distribution organization in the form of loans. It's not like taking money away, taking money off distribution companies to fund some other business areas. No. Suffice it to say, look at our EBITDA. Look at how much we're investing. Look at it on a yearly basis. You will easily see that this money comes back. This money gets reinvested to a very large extent. There was something else, I guess, G tariff. Right. For now, we wouldn't like to say anything because it's a process. We're in the middle of it. Any calculations, attempts to quote any specific numbers, it's too early. Very soon, we'll just know for certain what the situation is. No one has ever proposed it. It's difficult for us to make any comments on ideas that have never reached any stage of the legislative process. There are plenty of different ideas how one could try and lower. We're waiting. We're still in dialogue with the other party. Let's not answer questions about ideas that emerge. Only when something is in the legislative process, then we can answer. We can comment on it. We can engage in formal consultations. I would like to say that I envy people who can allow themselves to just talk about a specific subject that's part of a bigger picture. I think that what's been recently discussed publicly, you know, tariffs and WACC, now everyone seems to be an expert on WACC. I mean, Polish people have been experts on football, then on ski jumping, then lots of people became specialists on COVID. Later, lots of people started being experts on defense because of the war against Ukraine. Now everyone seems to have something to say about WACC. Joking aside, I think it makes sense to talk about the energy sector and the electricity sector in Poland. Let's look at it. Let's think about our distribution and transmission systems, how flexible they are. You know that there's yet another conference. There is a conference, all kinds of developers of energy sources come in, and they complain, saying that PSE refuses to issue terms of connection, that it takes time to connect new off-takers like industrial parks. There are discussions around poor quality of energy, of electricity transmission, and so on and so on. Actually, it's not about us having higher profits at the end of the day, unless we can execute a project that improves our grid, makes it more flexible, makes it more modern. I mean, certain things, you don't even see them, like remote meters. No one gets excited about it, but it's a must. We are spending hundreds of millions, just like laying cables. Laying cables, not very exciting. Someone puts cables underground, making sure that new sections of the network are free from impact of the weather. We had an example in the Podkarpacie region recently with the weather. We are aware that the reason why this discussion even began is that our industry is less and less competitive. Especially those energy-intensive sectors, they have high costs. We are very much interested in dialogue, in being in conversation about the level of WACC, about the level of how money from the national recovery plan is treated and how we shape tariffs. If we are in a dialogue, let's never forget the context. Just like Mr. Onichimowski said, our grid is just different. The way it operates is different. We can still connect new sources. We have ambition to connect new off-takers, be it industrial enterprises or individual households. We have to remember about the context. We have to remember about the optics of, you know, getting a reward from investments, getting some return on investment, on capital. That's our logic. We're not thinking just about the president and the discussion that he started, and then the Ministry of Energy that talks about dialogue around distribution and transmission tariffs. We look at midterm and long-term perspectives as well, which means that at the end of the day, someone has to spend the money to make our economy more modern, to make our customers, to give them access to modern, green, and renewable energy sources. Actually, those new energy sources require a completely different grid than the one we've been used to. For example, the fact that we have around 25 GW of PV, 11 GW of onshore wind, very soon several gigawatts of offshore. That's not the end. We'll see more and more PV. We'll see increasingly more wind, even though there might be some regulatory restrictions. Of course, everything changes. When or if offshore wind starts appearing, we will see. We would like to build storage facilities. We would like to build data centers. Distribution and transmission networks have to be invested in. Money has to be spent. There is no other way around it. That is the other side of the coin called WACC. On the one hand, it is our EBITDA or EBITDA of our distribution operations. Of course, on the other hand, we have CapEx. We, as well as other utilities, believe that these things are a priority for us. Bartłomiej Sawicki, Rzeczpospolita Parkiet. I have two questions in the context of our national specialty, namely distribution. As you are indicating in your report, WACC is 12.96%. Basically, it is the highest of all the companies in the group. What would happen with investing if it went down to 8.5%? Would you stop investing? Would you restrict, limit investing on Monday? Enea said, and because usually your conference comes after Enea's conference, so I'm quoting Enea's conference to you again. WACC for their distribution is around is 20%, and it's around 10% of their performance overall. What about Dolna Odra One? I think that the court repealed the environmental decision for it. What would happen with this facility? It's been operating for two years. Going to your first question, I wouldn't like to talk about all those levels that you mentioned because you talked about 8%. You spoke quite quietly. We would not like to get into this discussion, 8.5, 9.5, or 10.5. Let's wait. Let's not engage in a discussion. It's really going to be known very soon. Cards will be on the table very soon. Anyway, regardless of what's the share of WACC in the regulated revenue, because, well, our regulated revenue is really minority. Our process, our investment programs are calculated and designed in such a way that most of our EBITDA gets reinvested. If this EBITDA gets somehow, in any way, impacted or affected as a result of those decisions, we would have to sit down and think about it, but not guessing WACC. Simply knowing. When we know what it is, then we will think about possible adjustments. If this change is slight, probably we'll find a way to compensate for it. If WACC goes way down, then it could. It indeed could have an impact on our investment program in distribution because our strategy involves a number of areas where we have quite ambitious CapEx plans. Then we'd have to choose, I guess. For now, we're not assuming that other areas of our operations should fund CapEx in distribution. We would prefer to continue the policy of reinvesting what the distribution segment makes. That's the way to go. When we know all the data, we can get back to this discussion. Orlen says that for them, one percentage point of WACC less, it's minus 200 million revenue. Is the scale, the proportion more or less similar with you? I would say more or less. You know, there is a simple equation. If you round it like this, we're talking about hundreds of millions. One could assume that more or less. I think that we should sort of demystify certain things. What we're talking about is not WACC. Talking about WACC is a simplification to find a common denominator for all the different questions. I would say the problem in Poland is the cost of electricity for businesses, for the enterprise sector. I'm talking about large enterprises who are exposed to high costs of electricity. Because of that, their competitiveness is under threat. When it comes to customers under tariff G, we are being very responsible, very conscious. We do not have any intention to make individual households' costs higher. This discussion will not affect them. I guess everyone in the energy sector, but also the government or regulators, try to do everything that's possible to make cost of electricity for households rational, affordable. From our point of view, this has been addressed. Cost of electricity for businesses was the very reason why the team that we talked about before was appointed, because we're talking about competitiveness, especially of energy-intensive sectors of this economy. It goes way beyond WACC. There's something else, for example, power exchange and certain minimum levels that have to be achieved. We're talking about 55%, maybe a little bit less after some shutdowns. Still, we sell our electricity in a way that's transparent and competitive. There's something else, gas and obligatory levels of gas. Maybe not everyone is aware of the fact that we have the most expensive gas in the world. Looking at how the electricity and energy sectors change, and probably you've talked about it and you asked similar questions to Enea, we're not the only ones who want to invest in new gas units. We are not talking about clean dark spreads. We'll start talking about clean spark spreads as well very soon. All kinds of initiatives that lead to making the Polish economy more competitive, these initiatives should be maintained, should be executed, because as a result, the price, especially for the energy-intensive sectors, will become lower. That is the true name of the game or name of the problem. We are more than open to all kinds of discussions, all kinds of conversations. We are very much in favor of introducing certain regulations about gas and about a certain obligatory level of gas, because maybe this could lead to better competitiveness. We are also a good customer that can take good advantage of gas. I think these are the things you have to take into account. I mean, when you know what WACC is, it's easy to mention it and give it meaning, but it goes way more, way beyond WACC. There are also tariffs that we have to think of, and we are more than open to conversations, to communication. We do not want to overcomplicate things, and we do not want to engage in discussions like, "Oh, when WACC goes down, we will stop investing." Of course, it will not happen. These are things that are interconnected, interdependent. Of course, we might have to adjust or modify our investment program given tariffs, and we always do that. We are in a habit of doing that. You mentioned Orlen, who started also adjusting and doing some calculations. They did. Please remember that there's something else here, for example, financial levers and financial leverage, because, you know, EBITDA is a parameter, a performance measure that allows you to maybe take on debt if you need that. If so, you invest not only the money that you have made, you may invest some money that you've borrowed. I'm talking about it at length because I don't have much to say about the Dolna Odra project or the Dolna Odra facility, which was your second question. I know that there is something about the integrated permit. You called it Dolna Odra One, but actually it might be Dolna Odra Two because Dolna Odra One was called. We call it PGE Gryfino Dolna Odra. That's our name for it. That sort of reflects the new, the old and the new. Of course, we are there. We are working. We are doing detailed analysis of what happened there. You need to remember that these events that unfolded, they actually unfolded before 2024. The facility has been operating for a year now. It is our intent to clear this matter up, to really settle it once and for all. We are right now engaging with our legal advisors. We have opened, we have initiated dialogue with the government sector to understand better why this decision, this court verdict took place. For now, we are not seeing a big threat for the operation, the functioning of that facility, but we do know that there is some sort of regulatory and organizational effort that needs to be involved to get back to the right regulatory conditions that will allow us to operate that facility properly and smoothly. Thank you. Do you have any more questions? You may have a single question. You may ask it. Or we maybe take away some of your questions from the next conference. Joking. I would like to ask about something else, not gas, not distribution. Coal. How long will your open-cut facility in Bełchatów, how long will it be operated? Is it nearly over? And then Szczerców will be the only one that's left. Do you have any idea when you will stop Bełchatów? And do you have any idea or plans to recultivate this area? Not much has changed when it comes to moving from Bełchatów to the other facility, but it's running low. Will it be this year? Will it finish next year? I will answer to you via email because I'd have to check the schedule. When it comes to recultivation, our environmental permit stipulates clearly that we have to recultivate this area, both Bełchatów and Turów. For now, there is a plan, this initial plan. It has never changed that we would try, we would get those areas to their required states. We would recultivate those are as by flooding them. Right. What about costs? What about investment? Yes, of course. According to regulations, we establish provisions for recultivation, and we do know that this area will need to be recultivated for sure. It's a tricky question, or, I haven't prepared to encounter a question like this, but if you're really curious, we will deliver this information to you. It's a very niche topic. We'll tell you more. We will write you an email and we'll respond. Thank you. I'm looking at the room. I don't see any more questions. Thank you very much for coming. Thank you to those of you who are watching us online. Of course, see you at our next conference. Thank you. Have a good day.