Welcome to Vattenfall and this Q3 reporting webcast. I'm Andreas Regnell, and with me in the studio I have, as always, our CEO, Anna Borg, and our CFO, Kerstin Ahlfont. During this session, we will discuss the main events and the financial performance during the first nine months of 2022. After the initial session, we will open up for questions on the web and on the phone, and as usual, our standard slides are available online. Before we do anything else, let's have a look at some of the things ongoing in Vattenfall lately. Guided by our strategy and in response to the dynamic market, our portfolio is evolving. We invest in growth. We have built some of Europe's largest on and offshore wind parks, and we are currently building the Hollandse Kust Zuid offshore wind farm together with BASF. This will be the largest of its kind worldwide, with an installed capacity of 1,500 MW when fully operational in 2023. In line with the expansion in renewables, we are heavily investing in the grid to connect more customers with these new power sources. We also continue optimizing and maintaining the backbone of the Swedish electricity system, our hydro and nuclear business. We phase out fossil fuels in our own production. We have closed the coal-fired Hemweg 8 power plant in Amsterdam and the Moorburg power plant in Hamburg. In line with our ambitious CO2 roadmap, we are working on decarbonizing our district heating business in Berlin and replacing natural gas in our Dutch district heating business. We help our customers decarbonize their daily lives. We offer heat pumps and green gas to customers as an alternative to natural gas. Since the start of our EV charging network in InCharge in 2016, we have installed almost 40,000 charge points and delivered 220 million km of fossil-free transport in the first half of this year alone. We create strategic partnerships to decarbonize the industry sector. We have partnered with LKAB and SSAB to deliver fossil-free steel in our HYBRIT project. Together with SAS, LanzaTech and Shell, we are pioneering the production of sustainable aviation fuel. We are collaborating with offtakers on the Swedish west coast to create an end-to-end fossil-free electricity and hydrogen value chain. That was an example of some of all the exciting things ongoing in Vattenfall. These times are highly uncertain for us, our peers, our customers and partners. We are in the middle of all that. Prices are extremely volatile. Customers across Europe are struggling to pay their electricity and heating bills. On top of that, we see a risk for shortages of gas and electricity the coming winter. The EU and governments across Europe are taking historical measures to mitigate risk, these risks. How are we navigating all this, Anna? Well, it is challenging times indeed, and I think it's important to be both short-term and long-term at the same time now. Here and now, we need to support our customers to make sure that we can give them advice on how to reduce their consumption, but also how to choose the best kind of agreement for electricity for them and also with payment plans if needed. I think it's important to remember that the fundamental issue is a gap between supply and demand. At the same time, we need to focus on getting more fossil-free electricity generation into Europe. To manage both these perspectives at the same time will be extremely important. Completely agree. Super important. We'll talk more about this at the end of the discussion. Another thing that has happened is that we have a new government in Sweden, and they presented their Government Agreement, and that includes a lot of topics on energy. It also includes some explicit assumptions and expectations on Vattenfall. What would you say about that? Absolutely. I think that one of the really good things with this new agreement and ambition is that there is a clear target for 300 terawatt hours of electricity consumption in Sweden 2045, in order to meet the demand from society, but also for industry. That makes it sort of clear to have something to plan against, and that is of course not a Vattenfall target, it's a target for the entire Swedish energy system. In addition, there is a shift, so the target is no longer 100% renewable energy, it's 100% fossil-free energy. This of course opens up also for nuclear long term. I think that's also one of the main components in this, in this new setup, that the nuclear is a welcome part of the Swedish energy system now, but also in the future. This of course has an impact on us when it comes to planning our investments and what we do with the assets that we have and the assets that we would like to build in the future. Thank you. Now to you, Kerstin. Some of energy companies have been struggling quite severely over the last months. What about Vattenfall's financial position? Well, we have received many questions on that, and the short answer is that Vattenfall's financial position is strong. We are on the other side of the sort of trade compared to many of our competitors, meaning that we have actually in net received a lot of margin calls. At the moment, we actually experience excess liquidity, and that is also not without challenges. It means, and we know of course that the flows will be reversed at some point in time, but it gives us time to manage this and create buffers for future outflows. How about the results? Well, I would say that the results are stable. If you look at the underlying operating profit, that is slightly higher than last year. If you look at the profit for the period, that is lower, but that is mainly due to some exceptional one-offs that we had in the result in 2021. Thank you, we will get back to that, of course. Anna, shall we start with some of the business highlights? Absolutely. In our wind business, for example, we have now installed all the foundations and also some of the turbines in the Hollandse Kust Zuid project outside the Netherlands. We have actually also delivered the first electricity, but the wind farm will not be commissioned fully until next year, and it's Europe's largest offshore wind farm. Basically, every wind farm being built now is the largest one, but this is the one right now. We also decided to use our stepping rights for the German offshore wind project, N-7.2, which is - A very interesting name. Very interesting name, which is offshore in Germany. Provided that we make a final investment decision, that can be up and running and deliver electricity already in 2027, corresponding to approximately 1 million households. These are really big projects that come online now. In Heat, we have formed a joint venture with Midlothian Council in Scotland, and we have an ambitious business plan there. Together, we will invest in low-carbon energy projects. Now, maybe not the highlight, but a very important event is the delayed restart of Ringhals 4 after the regular maintenance, yeah. Yeah, that is, of course, especially unfortunate given the current market situation. The reactor is planned to be back in operation on the January 31st. On a more positive note, we actually got a go-ahead from the Swedish TSO to increase the capacity in Forsmark with 50 MW already this year and an additional 50 MW in 2023. Right. Our distribution business is also progressing well. We are continuing to invest. There is a sort of huge demand for connecting, especially when it comes to new production, but also new customers. Two things that we especially have seen increase a lot is the request to connect for solar panels, but also for hourly meter readings. We actually have been struggling to keep up with all the requests coming in. They have increased with more than 100% since last year. We know that we are not always as fast as we would like to be in this aspect. We are working hard in order to connect all customers that want to connect and also have more resources coming in in order to work with this. In our sales business, that is also progressing well. Many customers choose us, especially in Germany, in these uncertain times, and that is something that we of course appreciate. We also recognize that it is a very challenging situation for many of our customers, so we try to help and advise best we can. Yeah, we also make progress in our industrial partnerships, and we saw that in the film. If we detail a bit on HYBRIT, our cooperation with SSAB and LKAB, two things have happened. One is that our gas storage is now operational, where we have compressed fossil-free hydrogen, and it's actually a global unique location and technology. We're also seeing that the iron that we reduce through direct reduction, if you do that with hydrogen instead of natural gas, you actually get much better properties of the upcoming product, and it's also easier to transport. A big step forward on two fronts in the HYBRIT initiative. Right. We also see a great interest from our customers and partners looking into collaborating with us in different ways. Something that is happening more often now than before is that companies are also asking to co-own and co-build electricity productions with us. I think that's a really good example of corporations both in terms of small and big things coming alive. Innovation and cooperation will be absolutely key going forward. Okay. Enough with highlights. Let's now move over to the results, and I think they need some explanation. As we mentioned initially, the underlying result is slightly up, but the profit for the period is more than halved. On top of that, the adjusted net debt has decreased so much that it's now negative. Please, Kerstin, explain. What's going on here? Yeah, exactly. Well, I think we need to start off with the market development to set the scene. After the summer, the uncertainty in the market really spiked, and we saw very high prices and also extreme volatility. If you compare Q3 last year with this year, prices have increased on average 3x-4x in Germany and the Netherlands, and more than 2.5x in the Nordics. Even though prices have settled lately since the real peaks we saw in August, they are still on historically high level, and uncertainty is still high. Yet again, high levels of prices and uncertainty and volatility. Is that good for Vattenfall? Well, that is not so easy to say. In the short term, the reason for that is these electricity price area differences that we have and hedges. I think the hedging effect here is fairly straightforward, because what we normally do is that we sell a part of our production in advance, and we do that in order to lower the swings in the result and be able to make investments, for example, in a more stable way. That also means that when we do hedging and the prices are increasing, we get the prices that we already have sort of sold our production to, which is a lower price than the price in the market. The other way around, that when prices go down, we already sold part of our production to the prices that were higher, and so we then will have a higher result than the sort of average in the market. So far, it's fairly easy, and has been straightforward up until now. I pick you up on straightforward. Let's say that hedging is straightforward because it evens out results over time. That part is fully expected, and it will, as you say, be the reverse when prices go down again. What complicates things a bit in the Nordics is the electricity price areas, isn't it? Yeah. There are actually very limited hedging opportunities in the individual price areas because there is not liquidity in the traded market there. Normally, what we and everybody else do is that we hedge in the entire Nordic price, the system price, which is called the SYS. Then the hedge is the financial contract with a physical delivery in the end. Normally, when there are no price area differences, then the SYS price and the delivery price is the same. But right now, the price area differences are quite big, which means that we go into delivery in the area where you actually have the production, of course, because the production is fixed where it is. Then you get a different price than this system price. That's the impact we now see. Continuing a bit on the same, you see on the graph that historically, the price areas were relatively well synced with the SYS price. Lately, we've seen, particularly in the northern Sweden, SE1 and SE2, has decoupled from the SYS price. We are delivering in this price area, so that's complicating things a bit. Why is this negative? Well, if we start off with how it was before, when the prices in the price areas were linked to the SYS price, and let's say then that we hedge 1 MWh of our production, and we do that at the SYS price of EUR 30 per MWh, and then this SYS price increases to EUR 100 per MWh, then we have to pay EUR 70 to our counterparty in the trade. However, when we then come to the physical delivery, then we receive EUR 100 per MWh. In net, we are positive EUR 30. That would be how it once upon a time worked. Now, with the current scenario, where prices in the north are much lower than the SYS price, what is then happening? Well, again, SYS prices increase to EUR 100, so we will have to pay EUR 70 to our counterparty in the trade. If we have our production facility in the north and the price there is EUR 50 per MWh, then we receive EUR 50 when we deliver the physical electricity. We have to pay EUR 70 to our counterparty in the trade, and we receive 50. In net, you have EUR -20. You have actually delivered your electricity at a loss. Not necessarily super intuitive, but very true. It must impact our generation results quite a lot. What can you say about that? Well, the achieved price in the Nordics was EUR 17 per MWh, and that is compared to last year when it was EUR 31 per MWh. That is exactly because of what we just talked about, these price area differences that really started to decouple from SYS in the last quarter last year. That is why we have in the Power Generation segment a lower result, despite that market prices have increased. This is all due to hedging? Well, not really. We also have a lower trading result, but that is mainly due to temporary effects. That will be reversed. If you look at this from a perspective on if you take that out, it is really the hedging that has this impact. We did change our hedging policy. We reported on that already, I think two quarters ago. We do the hedges on a medium-term horizon, which means that it takes time before you see the impact of that change strategy in the results. Thank you. Complicated, but very important. Let's look at the other BAs. The story hasn't really changed that much since last quarter. Wind is doing a very good result. It's actually more than tripled its contribution. It's partly due to the higher prices, but it's also because we have more assets up and spinning. It's especially the Danish Kriegers Flak that is now up and running, and that of course increases the result as well. Also our sales business is performing well. Customers choose Vattenfall to a large extent because we are perceived as a stable and reliable partner, especially in a situation with a lot of turmoil like this one. That's also true to a large extent because we are an integrated energy company, so we have several different kinds of businesses. That also creates a bit of stability in the market situation like this. Then we have some temporary resourcing effects as well. Okay, higher results from Wind and Customer & Solutions. How about our Distribution business? Well, the Distribution business, as you saw in the slide, actually show a lower result, and there are two reasons for that. One is that there are higher costs for the transmission network in Sweden that is impacting us negatively. The main effect is actually because of the one-offs that Kerstin mentioned earlier that we sold the distribution business in Berlin. Last year that was in the numbers, and now it's out. I think we have been repeating ever since the end of last year and also every quarter that this and also the effect from compensation of nuclear in Germany has a huge impact on our business, and that is now visible in the distribution results, yeah. We have our financial metrics. Our net debt is now negative, because of all the inflow of margin calls, and we have a lot of liquidity, haven't we, Kerstin? Yes, this means that our regular capital structure metric, FFO-adjusted net debt, is actually not relevant now. If you look at that and exclude the margin calls, then the FFO-adjusted net debt on a rolling 12-month basis is 41.4%, so still on a very high level. One of the reasons for that is the compensation that we got for the early closure of German nuclear in the fourth quarter last year. If you look at the other KPI that we are following closely, ROCE, that is positively impacted by changes in market values for energy derivatives and inventories. If you look at that from an underlying basis, it ends up at 12.8%, which is slightly higher than last year when it was 11.7%. Okay. Let's go back a bit to the topic of capital structure and debt. Vattenfall issued a EUR 1.65 billion bond earlier this, a few days ago. Why do we do that if we have so much cash? Well, even if we are receiving now a lot of margin calls, we also know that eventually these margin calls will be reversed. We have also seen that this can happen fairly quickly. We decided to issue these bonds in order to stay prudent and safeguard our liquidity, and we did it in the shorter part of the curve. Finally, profit for the period. We said that it's down, and it's actually down by 60%. How come? Well, the main reason for this, again, is these extraordinary items that we had in 2021. We sold our distribution business in Germany, and we also received this compensation for early closure of nuclear in Germany. I think it's important to look at that when you compare the years because that is, of course, not there this year. What about the effects from the market environment? Well, we have that as well, and you find that in the items affecting comparability, and it's connected to fair values of energy derivatives. If you really look at this on a sort of a year-over-year comparison, the comparison is really dwarfed by these two one-offs that Anna mentioned earlier. Yes. Let's now broaden the focus a little bit. As we mentioned, the current situation is very, very challenging for households and companies and the society as a whole and there's a lot of financial pressure out there. In light of this, there's a lot of discussions about market interventions and similar measures. Anna, what would you say about that? Well, first of all, I would say that unfortunately there is no quick fix to this problem, because it is a fundamental gap between demand and supply. The fastest way to mitigate the effects of this is to reduce demand, to reduce consumption. That will lower the bills for customers, but it will also lower the price in the market in general, especially if we can lower the consumption during the peak hours, which are usually early in the morning and in late afternoon, early evening. There are actually several research institutes that have looked into this, and one of them say that if Europe is managing to reach the target set of reducing consumption by 10%, that could actually lead to half the price in the southern part of Sweden. That's the kind of impact that we are talking about. Dramatic effect. What about the political measures? Yes, on the EU level, there's been three regulatory packages proposed so far, and one of them actually include a revenue cap on some of the electricity generation. Okay, that means in practice that you're just allowed to have a certain maximum price on your assets, and whatever comes above, you have to redistribute to consumers to reduce their energy bills. Yes, I think that in extraordinary times like this, it's also reasonable with extraordinary measures, and that is what we see here. I think it's important to safeguard two things, and one is that it's not counteracting this demand reduction that we need. The other one is that it's not hampering investments into new fossil-free electricity production, because that's the only way to fix the problem for real and long term. Completely important comment. Can you say something about the financial impact on Vattenfall? Well, the implementation of this is not quite clear yet. It is an agreement on an overall level, but the implementation will then happen country by country. The timing for this can also differ, so it's actually too early to say what the financial impact will be, but there will, of course, be one. There's also in line with this, there are also discussions on to decouple electricity from gas price and essentially have a cap on gas that is used for electricity. What would be the effect of this? Well, it would lower the overall prices, of course, but it could also increase the gas consumption, which is not what is needed right now, and that's also what all of Europe has been struggling with, up until now to make sure that the gas storages are filled and that not more gas than necessary is used. It's important to be careful about that. What is a bit tricky with wholesale market interventions in general is that the market gives price signals in order to sort of distribute the resources in an efficient way. If you start to make changes in that, you could actually have effects that you couldn't foresee, and then you need to make another intervention. It's important to really sort of keep the price signals and think about the consequences of this. Yes. In line with what you just said, there are also discussions about changing the overall electricity market design. What's your view on that? Well, again, it's not the market design that is the main cause of the problems we see now. It's the gap between demand and supply. The fact that the price goes up when there is a much lower supply is fairly natural. But what is important is to make sure that we can close this gap in a good way by building more electricity generation. I think it's important to really analyze the consequences of any changes that would be implemented in the market model. There are things that would be welcome, for example, putting a price on flexibility and availability of resources and generation in the market. We will have to wait and see. What you're saying is that we need the market signals because the market signal is saying that there is a scarcity of energy. If you take that market signal out of operation, you risk to get the opposite, that the consumption goes up and essentially that energy isn't there. Yet the high prices does put a lot of pressures on consumers. What does Vattenfall do to help our customers? Well, as I said, the only way for a customer to influence their cost short-term is by reducing demand. Then it's mainly about heating in your home, but it's also about consuming warm water, which is actually 25% of the need in an energy household. Those are the two things that I would immediately look at. Also to reduce the consumption during these peak hours will lower the overall price. Then you will get a double effect. You will get a lower bill because you consume less, but also because the price is lower. Behavioral changes are also important. In addition to that, we are also supporting a number of initiatives. For example, we are partnering up with FIXbrigade in The Netherlands, who are providing energy-saving solutions to households in Amsterdam. They are providing, for example, draught excluders, sealing gaps or installing LED lights or water-saving shower heads. These energy savings can actually be quite substantial. Yeah. I agree, and I think they are very important for the customers short term. We are also supporting with advice and payment plans if needed, et cetera. We will put a lot of focus on solving the sort of long-term fundamental issue, which is the investments that are needed to bridge this gap between demand and supply. We need more electricity production, all kinds of it. We need more nuclear, more wind, more hydro, but we also need more grids in order to get the electricity to where it's needed and when it's needed. I think in order for all these things to happen, it's gonna be important to have faster permitting processes. We see several examples around Europe of that happening or efforts being taken in order to make that happen. We also need a reasonably stable and predictable legislation in order to get all these investments in there now. Very much agree, and important comments. With that, I leave the floor open to questions. There are two questions. I'll take the first one. Please, could you give your expectations for the energy situation over the winter in the Nordics? Do you expect rationing and shortage of power or gas? What about the following winter? That was the first question. The second, how easy is it to increase the capacity of Forsmark, 50 MW in 2022 and 50 MW in 2023? Are there supply chain bottlenecks for any components? How much will these upgrades cost? Okay. Shall we start with the situation in Nordics Yeah This winter and the coming? Yeah. I actually think that the situation for the winter is very uncertain, both in the Nordics and in Europe. Normally, the Nordics is a net exporter of energy, so I think that the pricing of the energy will probably be more of a risk than the actual shortage of energy in the Nordics. However, as we are connected to the European energy system, and there we see fairly well-filled gas storages right now in order to meet the winter season, but it depends a lot on how cold it will be, both in the Nordics and in Europe, and if there are any other events in the market that can impact this. A lot of uncertainty still, I would say, and the need for this demand reduction in order to avoid a shortage during the winter period, both in the Nordics and in Europe. I think there was a question about the next coming winter as well in there. Yes I think we still will have a difficult situation next winter because building this additional electricity generation that is needed will take some time. There will be more projects up and running next winter, provided that the permissions for the wind farms especially that are quite far in the planning will be there. It will not be enough to bridge all of the 40% of gas that used to come from Russia into Europe. It will be a tricky winter next winter as well. Let's get to the second. How easy is it to increase the capacity of Forsmark 50 MW in 2022 and 50 MW in 2023? Well, actually, we increased 50 MW now in Forsmark 1. We got the approval from the transmission operator only this week or maybe last, so that's really good. The second step is another 50 MW of increase in 2023. There is not a sort of risk from a supplier perspective, which was also part of the question, because we have planned this for quite some time, and it's only the sort of final things that we need to fix during revision next year in order to get the additional 50 MW up there. Thank you. Let's go to the next question from Matas Gudauskas from Covalis Capital. Third quarter Customers & S olutions reported almost SEK 1 billion higher operating profit. Is it fair to assume the improvement is mainly linked to electricity and gas sellbacks to the market driven by lower demand? It is a combination, as we also mentioned in the presentation, of increased customer base, mainly in Germany. We have 400,000 more customers this year than last. It is also, as the journalist there or the analyst is asking or claiming that we have a certain sort of sellback of hedges due to the temperatures we saw last winter. Thank you. We get to Samu Wilhelmsson. Considering Ringhals 4 delay, is it fair to assume that the output from the plant is already hedged? It would mean that you are left with short positions in the power market where power prices are extremely volatile. Are you expecting significant losses for the rest of the year, and is there any special needs to adapt your operations to offset this? Maybe I can ask the first part of the question and Kerstin can answer the second. First of all, we are not hedging assets by asset. We are hedging on an overall Vattenfall level. There are no sort of specific hedges allocated to any specific kinds of generation or assets. Secondly, we don't hedge all of our generation. We didn't do that before, and we're gonna hedge to, well, even lower extent going forward. It's not that that we were fully hedged when we went into this period. I mean, in order to understand the magnitude of the sensitivity, you can only sort of take the power that Ringhals 4 should have produced and then multiply it with the spot price that you would have had if it was in operation. That is the loss that we and the other owner, Uniper, are making on this. When it comes to how we can adjust that, I mean, we are continuously looking into how to adjust the hedges, so that goes without saying. Besides that, it's really to put all hands on deck in order to now manage the situation and get the unit up and running as soon as we can in a safe manner. Thank you. Next question from Camilla Naschert at S&P Global. Given the delays and budget overruns with current new nuclear plants in Europe, is Vattenfall confident that the reactors in Sweden can be different? What are the lessons the nuclear industry is learning? Well, we are analyzing right now what we think is possible or not, and what we specifically have started is the feasibility study for small modular reactors. The projects that are referred to are the more traditional large-scale reactors, and we know there's been a lot of delays and increased costs for those. The technology around small modular reactors is very interesting and developing quite fast as well. Of course, we need to see that the expectations on that technology deliver, both from a technical and practical and financial perspective. However, I think it's also valid to say that there are some projects regarding large-scale nuclear going on in the world right now, for example, in the United Arab Emirates and in South Korea, which indicates that the sort of both timing and price could be better for also large-scale reactors. That remains to be seen, and it's a part of the work that we are doing. Thank you. I think you answered the next question now from Anne Filbert. Is Vattenfall working on any future developments on new nuclear power in Sweden? I would argue that you answered that. That's the feasibility study of SMR. I would like to add something, and that is that now that we see that nuclear will be a part of the energy puzzle also more long-term in Sweden, we're also looking to further lifetime prolongation of the existing reactors beyond 2040. We're also looking into possibilities to do further increases of effects or capacity in the existing reactors where we haven't done that yet. Specifically, that would be Forsmark 3. Thank you. Andrew Moulder is back. Fortum has spoken about lack of liquidity in the forward hedging market. Are you seeing a lack of liquidity? How easy is it for you to hedge? There is a lower liquidity in the market, in basically all of the markets in the Nordics and in Europe, and that of course limits our possibilities a bit compared to what it looked like before. That's a market situation, and we share that with Fortum and everybody else. Andrew Moulder again. You said you issued the bond to safeguard liquidity, but the Swedish government has said it would provide guarantees for companies to meet margin payments. Why not avail of that if you need to? Do you not want to rely on Swedish government guarantees? Well, we have seen, of course, the Swedish governmental guarantees, and we think they are good in order to sort of put more security in the market as such. Our ambition is, of course, to manage our own liquidity, and we have time to do that, given that we are sort of on the right side of the trade at this point in time. We have a liquidity stress mandate that we are working against, and that is quite conservative. These are measures we are taking in order to make sure that we can ourselves actually manage the future outflows of margin calls. Thank you. Next question from Frank Siu from Cardano. What is your financial policy when it comes to commitment to the credit ratings? In terms of the commitment of the credit ratings, I assume that they are referring to our commitment to the ratings that we have. I assume so, yes. Yeah. I mean, what we can say is that we deliver a stable result and we are financially strong, and we are fully committed to continue to deliver according to the owner's targets, both when it comes to the capital structure target, where we should be between 22% and 27% of FFO over adjusted net debt, and also about 8% when it comes to ROCE. Right now, we are over-delivering on both these parameters, even if you take away the margin calls and the one-offs, et cetera. I would say that we are well in line with the expectations from that perspective. Thank you. Matas Gudauskas from Covalis Capital again. Could you split how much a margining inflow is linked to German and how much to Nordic retail portfolio, and why that was not offset with your generation portfolio hedges? Well, we have large portfolios both in the Nordics and on the continent. In the Nordics, we are both a large generator, but we also have our customer portfolio. Our generating portfolio is larger than the customer portfolio, which means that in net, when prices are increasing, we are paying out margin calls in the Nordic market. Whereas in the continental market, we are a net buyer on the exchanges and on the OTC market. There, when prices increase, we are receiving margin calls. If you look at the sizes of these portfolios, then the continental portfolio is actually overweighting the impact of the Nordic portfolio, which means that in an increasing market environment, we receive net our whole portfolio margin calls. Thank you. Clear. Philip Akoto from Energate. Could you give an update on the possible sale of Vattenfall's share of GASAG and the district heating business in Berlin? Would it be conceivable for Vattenfall to sell the district heating business in Berlin to someone other than the State of Berlin? Well, first of all, we are in a sort of strategic process where we are evaluating whether we should continue to own or divest the heat Berlin business, and that process is not finalized yet. When it is, and if we decide that we want to divest, we will do a normal process around this, which will be open, fair, and transparent to anyone who would be willing to participate. We actually see a quite large interest. It is a good business that will be needed in Germany and in Berlin going forward with a lot of opportunities. That's where we are at the moment. Thank you. Jakob Magnussen. Is it completely impossible to invest in Ringhals 1 and 2 in order to make them operational again, rather than building completely new? Ringhals 1 and 2 is a choice that was made by Vattenfall and the other owner, Uniper, quite a long time ago, and that's also when you choose the investment path. We have already started the decommissioning of these plants, so Ringhals 1 and 2 are not complete facilities anymore. That means that, apart from the fact that it's not legal to restart closed reactors and that they are also not fulfilling the security, the modern safety requirements when it comes to independent core cooling. We also have started to take away components from these power plants and reuse them in other nuclear power plants elsewhere. We've taken out material from them in order to do different tests and research on how materials are aging in this kind of environment that we can utilize in our other operations. We have also sort of used some acids in part of the piping system and the components in these facilities. You do that in order to reduce the radioactivity in there. That also has an impact on the materials in these plants. It is simply too late to do that. Thank you. Now comes the last question from Andrew Moulder. How would you reconcile a gas price with a need to attract market-priced LNG into Europe? Wouldn't a gas price cap cause suppliers to shift deliveries to higher price areas? Or would governments or the EU need to provide a top-up so that the international suppliers could still receive the market price? Well, this is of course something that is heavily discussed in the European community, and let's see what they will come up with in the end. Of course, there is such a risk. On the other hand, the price is still so high in Europe that also with the price cap, most likely LNG would come towards Europe. Again, that depends on the market price in Europe, but it also depends on the demand in other parts of the world, in Asia, for example. It's always tricky when you start to intervene with market mechanisms, because as we said before, you can have effects that you didn't foresee, and then you need to take additional measures. The answer is not obvious. Thank you. I have no other question here. Is there a question on the phone? No question on the phone. That means that we have answered the last question. With that, I thank you all for listening in and participating. Until next time in the new year, I will say welcome back then.