Media appearances

My participation in the discussion moderated by Roxana Lazarescu, together with Emanuel Cernat and Adrian Cioroianu Thursday, August 20, Digi24 Some of the ideas scored: When several crises hit you at the same time, you work with the tools you set up before they started. You cannot invent new production capacities overnight if you did not plan and finance them 3-4 years ago…. How do we get through these critical weeks? With two direct levers: imports and demand management. We rely heavily on electricity imports from Bulgaria (with which we have the largest interconnection capacity, of almost 2000 MW) and we hope that the wind will blow. Otherwise, the immediate solution remains moving and reducing consumption outside the problematic hours. The risk areas are well known: the interval 8-9 in the morning and especially in the evening, from 19:00 to 23:00. Related to the list of large industrial consumers and the state of alert: the notifications sent do not mean that factories are closing. That is exactly why the list was made and the warnings were sent, so that the big operators are aware of the situation and prepare their internal management protocols. The real challenge only begins now, from September onwards. Vacations end, schools reopen, institutions resume activity at maximum speed and energy and fuel consumption automatically increases. On top of all this pressure from the energy market (drought, low Danube, stopped reactor at Cernavoda) tax increases are superimposed. Higher electricity bills will hit an already stressed consumer from all directions. However, there is a pipeline of projects to be put into operation, including storage, which should give us another breath of fresh air. Until these new capacities materialize, we remain dependent on the tools of the moment: imports from neighbors in expensive hours, adaptation of consumption and hope that the weather will be on our side.

About "competition" in the fuel market (retail area). 2 days after the excise duty dropped by 20% (68 bani), 4 large oil companies (Petrom, Rompetrol, OMV and MOL) had the same price for diesel: 10.2 lei / liter. Where is the competition? Where is the price diversity? … In a market where you have real competition, we should see 9.99 lei/liter at one gas station, 10.17 lei at another, 10.12 lei/l, 10.23 lei/liter and so on (random prices, for example). That means DIFFERENT prices! But when you have 4 companies that display the same price for diesel (10.2 lei/liter), you have to ask yourself questions. This clearly indicates that the sellers "agree" on the price. The specialized term in economics is "price collusion" and it is considered an anti-competitive practice, so it is directly related to the competence and object of activity of the Competition Council. Meanwhile, compared to the time of this discussion (which took place on August 19), Petrom lowered the price of diesel to 10.14 lei/liter. However, today, August 26, we still have 3 companies (Rompetrol, OMV and MOL) that have the same price: 10.2 lei/liter. If this is not price fixing and cartel like behavior, then what is? There is, of course, a real tension in the regional market that cannot be ignored. We cannot pretend that there is complete peace and that prices are rising completely for no reason. We have logistical blockages (the dramatic drop in the level of the Danube, which may have affected river transport and forced the finding of more expensive alternative import routes). However, after applying the discount of 68 money, drivers should have seen the price of 10 lei maintained for at least a week. Those who drive second-hand diesel cars (for which they paid 3,000 or 5,000 euros) are not rich people, and the tax burden remains too aggressive. The state took a first step by reducing 68 money, but the fiscal burden still remains high. Gas stations, also, should understand that the relationship with drivers matters in the medium and long term. To drop to 9.99 lei only to raise the price immediately back in 2 days is perceived by many drivers as a joke. The new generation of drivers is oriented towards electric vehicles, and if you want to pursue this fuel business in the medium/long term, you must also focus on the relationship with the drivers, not only on the profit margin. My intervention on Wednesday, August 19 at Digi24

Discussion on Monday, August 17, from Știrile TVR, about: The data published by the INS about the decrease in production and the increase in imports in the period January-June 2026 (compared to 2025). The decrease in nuclear production in the first part of the year has an explanation: the planned shutdowns from May-July (unit 1 was shut down for another month and a half, and reactor 2 for 20 days). Gas imports naturally increased against the backdrop of consumption in the cold season, and the 27% jump in imported petroleum products was the reaction to ensure diesel stocks after the March scare. Why are the neighbors doing better? Bulgaria followed the poor man's option and pragmatically invested in batteries. Instead of throwing themselves into "strategic" projects and illusions of a regional hub, the Bulgarians chose investments with a lower degree of ambition, but applied. A few years later, this realistic approach places them in a much more comfortable position than ours. Regarding the small modular reactors (SMRs) from Doicesti: the problem is not the technology. There are dozens of SMR models in the world and it remains to be seen which will be commercially successful. The real problem is related to the structuring of the project. Nuclearelectrica must be left to focus on its main, income-generating activity (the safe operation of units 1 and 2 and the preparation of reactors 3 and 4). It is a mistake to burden the company with the role of leader in a pioneering project, given that it has been left behind with vital works on the existing infrastructure. The problem of directing water on the Bala branch was identified since 2002-2003, the technical solution existed since 2006, the approvals were taken since 2022, and the year 2026 caught us with the unfinished work. On SMR, Nuclearelectrica can have at most a minority exposure, the financial risk in a "first-of-a-kind" project must be shared with other investors and external partners.

About the 20% reduction in excise duty on diesel A wiser decision by the Ministry of Finance (compared to the initially announced reduction of only 10%), but still with the price of 2 euros/liter we remain at the pump! Romania is not Germany, nor Denmark, nor Belgium or Finland. We cannot compare ourselves economically with these rich countries to bear the same level of prices. The platoon in which we are running economically is different. Therefore, diesel prices here must be more than in Bulgaria, more than in Poland. A real tax reduction would anchor the costs in the purchasing power of the economy. The fundamental problem remains the suffocating taxation. Why do we have an excise tax of 2.1 lei per liter when we could have one of 1.4 lei? Why should we have a VAT of 21% when it could be 19% or even 15%? We stabilize Romania macroeconomically, and microeconomically we die individually. Many entrepreneurs are already at the limit, others have already gone bankrupt. When you live in continuous uncertainty, you enter a survival shell. The first reaction is to postpone investments, and without investments you don't have economic growth. What's next from autumn? If the prices on the international markets increase, the excise tax reduction will be completely destroyed from September. Europe is facing a structural deficit of diesel, and Romania is an importer of diesel. Any increase in external quotations will affect us, and a 20% or even 25% cut in excise duty will not be nearly enough to absorb the shock. My intervention on Monday, August 17 at Digi24

My participation in the discussion with Christian Năsulea and Paula Rusu, at Euronews Romania, Monday, August 17. Related to storage: when we see almost 630-680 MW injected into the network in the evening, the bulk does not come only from batteries installed at home by prosumers, but from industrial battery projects. Residential batteries have a local effect (reduce consumption from the network). We also have a statistical discrepancy between the Transelectrica data and the European ENTSO-E platform (where only large storage capacities of over 100 MW are reported), given that we have many medium power storage capacities (between 10 and 60 MW). Plus, many batteries were put into operation accelerated even this year and are still not found in the statistics from ENTSO-E. At the micro level, the real economy suffers, small and medium-sized companies feel every cost shock. But, it is true that the high import prices did not extend throughout the day, but hit at the peak of the evening (between 19:00 and 22:00). Regional dependence in a complicated hydrological context. The energy sector can no longer function disconnected from environmental forecasts and climate risk analysis. As long as we sit and pray for water to come to the Danube to keep the reactors on, we are paying the cost of postponed projects and unfinished works, but also of the lack of long-term vision. Because improvisations have no place in energy strategy.

Reduction of excise duty on diesel fuel by 20% between August 16-31. My recommendation for drivers: take advantage of this temporary relaxation of the price at the pump, because no one can guarantee what will happen after the end of August. Where do the price increases come from? … Certainly not from the international quotation of crude oil, where in the first part of August the barrel was around 79-88 dollars. The real problem comes from the refined products market, where Romania is dependent on diesel imports. And the critical factor is what is happening in the Russian Federation: the accelerated loss of refining capacity has transformed an energy giant (which exports fuel) into an actor that suddenly goes shopping abroad itself. Thus, Russia is looking to buy the same diesel that we are trying to buy. Related to the differences between gas stations: the 20% reduction in excise duty (ie -68 money per liter) brought the prices to around 10 lei. The fact that at some stations we see 9.99 lei is just marketing – a penny less does not change the fact that you still pay 10 lei per liter. There are also gas stations that cut less, such as the case of Lukoil (where the liter is 10.35 lei). The explanation has to do with logistics: with its own refinery in Romania shut down, the company has considerably higher transport and import costs because it brings fuel from abroad. The structural problem remains, however, the huge fiscal burden of the Romanian state. It is not normal for Romania to have more expensive fuels than Bulgaria, Hungary or Poland. When you fill up 60 liters and pay 600 lei at the pump, almost 300 lei go directly to the state's accounts. It is enormous and completely inappropriate for an economy like ours. My intervention on Sunday, August 16 at Digi24

There is a tendency to blame the traders during this period. In this sense, I don't think that the hosts of the show "extracted" from me what they wanted this time, namely: a condemnation of the companies importing electricity from Bulgaria and a labeling as if they were the new "smart guys". I can say what the technical and commercial reality of imports entails, that is, the mechanics of trading. Bringing energy from outside is not a simple business. First of all, there is a clear distinction between the supplier (who sells directly to the final consumer) and the trader (who operates exclusively on the wholesale market and the import-export area). To transfer energy from Bulgaria to Romania, a company must hold a trading license from both ANRE and the Bulgarian ANRE (which is called the Energy and Water Regulatory Commission). It must be registered simultaneously on the Romanian stock exchange (OPCOM) and on the Bulgarian stock exchange (IBEX). In addition, the allocation of cross-border capacities is done through a dedicated European platform (Joint Allocation Office, JAO). Beyond the procedures and regulations, the entry barriers are very high. You must prove that you have financial credit, provide consistent bank guarantees, pay licensing fees and annual contributions to the regulator. Not everyone can afford such financial costs. The fact that such a company operates with a small number of people (1-3 employees) is not a conspiracy. The contemporary trading of goods and energy is a highly digitized activity, based on electronic platforms, not on dense personnel schemes. What are the private companies that ensure imports to blame for the fact that the Romanian state did not complete its gas plants on time, did not unclog the Bala branch on the Danube and ignored investments in storage batteries for years in a row? Trading companies do not create the crisis in the system. They respond to a massive deficit generated by our lack of internal production. When you have an energy gap in the network, someone has to bring electricity from across the border. The high price in the market and dependence on imports do not come from the bad will of the traders, but from the structural vulnerabilities created by our delayed decisions and investments not made on time. This does not exclude the obligation of the authorities to check the activity of traders and to penalize irregularities. My intervention on Saturday, August 15 at Antena 3

Beyond my personal enthusiasm for the phenomenon of prosumers in Romania, I have to make an addition. The amount of 680 MW (the equivalent of a Cernavoda reactor) that we observed injected into the transport network from the storage facilities in the evening of August 13 (when both nuclear reactors were shut down) cannot be attributed only to prosumers. Prosumers have their role and their exercise of solidarity was and is important because it reduces the consumption of the transport network. However, at the level of the transport network (which is handled by Transelectrica), there we rather see the effect of the companies' storage projects, that is, industrial storage. Both actors (both the small and the big) contribute essentially in this period. Our economic reality, since the last year, is dictated exclusively by macroeconomic arguments – reducing the budget deficit is the ultimate goal. However, keeping taxes high, for too long, means brutally ignoring the Laffer curve. If you press too hard on the tax pedal, you kill consumption and destroy your taxable base. Yes, in the first instance you will get an increase in the income of the state budget, but if you keep taxation high for too long, you will get the opposite effect: more and more companies will go bankrupt, no more investments will be made, consumption will decrease, evasion will increase, and active people will be able to move their tax residence to other countries (in the same Bulgaria, for example, where the income tax is 10% and the dividend tax is 5%). Tax increases are a double-edged sword and must be used carefully and sparingly, if you as a state want to have someone to tax. On the fuel front, we only have a temporary respite. The government decided to reduce the excise duty on diesel by 20% (much more useful than the initial percentage of 10%). The measure is welcome, even if it is timid. Fuel price increases in the near future will not come so much from what is happening in the Middle East as from Russia, as the events there can influence the regional diesel market. Ukrainian drone attacks have destroyed an important part of Russian refining capacity. The latest figures indicate an extremely high degree of destruction – up to 65-80% of the decommissioned refining capacity. When Russia (which faces its own shortage of diesel fuel in agriculture and transport) goes out to buy fuel on the global market, prices will rise for other buyers. My intervention at Digi24 on Thursday, August 13, at Jurnalul de Sără with Cosmin Prelipceanu.

Regarding storage: the batteries don't last the day for nothing. At noon, when we have sun, the photovoltaic panels produce massively (they can reach 3,000 MW, that is, more than half of the country's electricity). Then the batteries are charged. In the evening, after 19:00, the batteries inject into the network and can inject up to 630 MW (almost as much as a nuclear reactor from Cernavoda!). What will we rely on during this period? On coal production (for energy in the strip): we have the three groups of 330 MW at work, plus group 4 from Rovinari (which will be removed from the reserve), which together amounts to about 1300 MW. To this capacity is added the energy from hydro (approximately 1000 MW) and gas plants, such as CETs and the OMV Petrom unit from Brazi (which alone has 860 MW) and renewable production. How do we get into the practice of peak consumption in the evening? The voluntary reduction works very well. The factories that scheduled their revisions in August, the domestic consumers who agreed to move the large household appliances outside the peak hours are already bringing a vital economy to the system (about 200-300 MW). In extremis, we can call on additional imports from the Bulgarians, and Hidroelectrica can add about 300 MW from the reservoirs (normally kept for the winter). Related to the list of uninterruptible industrial consumers: factories and plants don't stop all the time. The national energy dispatcher is exactly like an orchestra conductor. His technical task is to permanently keep production equal to consumption. This list just gives him an extra safety tool. Large consumers are not disconnected from the chaotic network, but their supply is interrupted (strictly temporarily!) only in critical situations and mandatory on the basis of a legal notice of 24 hours. My intervention on Thursday, August 13, at Digi24

A lot of people look at the Transelectrica graphs at lunch and jump to the conclusion that the storage facilities are idle because they show zero. It's not like that. At noon, when the solar panels or wind turbines produce massively, the batteries are charged, and in the evening the installations start injecting into the grid (even 500-600 MW at peak hours). Why are the neighbors doing better? The Bulgarians moved extremely skillfully to attract European funds and seriously invested in storage capacities. That's what they did and we didn't. Moreover, the Kozlodui plant has a separate water supply circuit for cooling the reactor (a 7 km artificial channel from the Danube to the plant + a back-up system with some closed-circuit reservoirs). Compared to us and the Hungarians, who take water directly from the Danube and depend on its flow, they avoided this vulnerability. Related to prosumers and financing programs: I had an obvious slip-up in the way the Casa Verde program was thought. Over 90% of the panels are on the roofs of the residential area, and the state pumped money exclusively into production, ignoring the storage component. The correction came much too late to be able to fix anything in the current crisis. Beyond this moment, it is a strategic error to model the drought and reactor shutdown as some very rare scenarios (once every 15-20 years). The speed with which the climate is changing forces us to take this risk into account much more than before, because we can hit it every 2-3 years or even annually. In 2 years we could easily recover the gap we have with Bulgaria. But other sources of energy should not be ignored. Geothermal in our country is at the bottom of the frog's leg (it barely appears with half a percent in the statistics), and biomass shyly brings only 60 MW into the system. My intervention on Thursday, August 13, at TVR News