Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the presentation of Snam's consolidated results for the first half of 2026, which were approved by the board earlier today.

I am here with Agostino Scornajenchi, Snam CEO and General Manager, and Luca Passa, Chief Financial, Sustainability and International Asset Management Officer. The presentation will be divided into three parts: first, Agostino will offer an overview of recent market developments and the main industrial and financial milestone achieved during the period.

Luca will then provide a detailed overview of our financial performance. After that, Agostino will provide the closing remarks followed by the usual live Q&A session.

With that, I'm pleased to hand over to Agostino.

Thank you very much, Francesca. Good afternoon, everybody.

Before commenting our first half results, I would like to start with a broader perspective on the energy system on slide number 3. When discussing energy, it is important to keep a clear view of the facts and the underlying numbers.

In Italy, as in many other major European countries, figures state that natural gas is the backbone of the energy system. In particular, in Italy, it accounts for around 37% of the country's primary energy consumption, making it the largest single energy source.

Its importance becomes even clearer when looking at power generation. While electricity accounts for only around one quarter of Italy's final energy consumption, a share that has remained broadly stable over the past decade, natural gas generates roughly half of the country's domestic electricity production, excluding imports, which account for around 15% of supply.

This underscores the critical role of natural gas in ensuring flexibility and system balancing. Its contribution is not only essential today, but is likely to become even more important in the years ahead.

As renewable penetration continues to increase, the need for flexible generation capacity will grow. At the same time, ongoing electrification of final uses and new sources of demand, including data centers, could trigger electricity consumption growth after years of stagnation, further reinforcing the need for a reliable and resilient gas-fired generation fleet, which is the only flexible generation technology available.

This is why we believe the future is not about replacing one technology with another. It's about building an increasingly integrated, diversified, and resilient energy system where electricity, molecules, storage, and infrastructure will work together.

This is why we consider this as the energy integration era. Moving now to slide number 4.

We are living in a world increasingly shaped by competing geopolitical blocks, where access to energy is once again become a source of economic and strategic power. The events of the past few years, from the war in Ukraine to the recent escalation in the Middle East, have reminded us the importance of resiliency.

One lesson stands above all others: energy systems must be diversified and built with redundancy. We need multiple routes, multiple suppliers, and sufficient spare capacity to absorb shocks that are unpredictable by definition.

The slide clearly illustrates how rapidly Italy has transformed its supply mix, moving from a system largely dependent on pipeline import from Russia to a significantly more diversified one, leveraging both the flexibility of existing gas infrastructure and the addition of new strategic assets. In particular, LNG plays a pivotal role in this transformation.

LNG imports have more than doubled since '21 and accounted for 32% of total inflows in the first half of 2026, supported by the commissioning of the Piombino and Ravenna regasification terminals. As a result, LNG has evolved from a complementary source of supply into a structural pillar of Italy's energy security, significantly enhancing the flexibility, resilience, and diversification of the country's gas system.

In this context, Italy holds a unique position in Europe, with 5 entry points by pipe and 5 LNG terminals, diversified sources of supply, and strong connectivity with both North Africa and Central Europe. This creates optionality, which has become one of the most valuable asset in today's geopolitical environment.

Italy can really help Europe enhancing its security of supply. Such security of supply is built on two complementary pillars: diversified import routes and strategic storage capacity.

I'm now on slide number 5. Diversification protects against supply disruption or changes.

Storage provides flexibility, meets seasonal demand peaks, and acts as a strategic buffer, helping market stabilization during period of stress. This has become even more evident over the last few years.

Through a proactive approach and close coordination with institution and the regulator, Snam has ensured the condition for a timely and efficient storage refill ahead of winter. As of today, storage level reached around 70% of total available capacity, compared with a European average of approximately 55%, and this including Italy.

Moreover, through auctions held in April, it has been allocated sufficient capacity to achieve the target of filling Italian gas storage facility to at least 90%. The coordinated effort of institution in achieving this target has helped minimize overall system cost.

This really represents a critical factor in the current context of supply uncertainty, supporting system security while helping to mitigate price volatility and reducing market speculation. While storage filling is a necessary condition, it is not sufficient on its own to ensure security of supply throughout the next winter.

Nevertheless, thanks to its storage position, diversified supply portfolio, and infrastructure flexibility, Italy is currently better positioned than many, many other European countries. Now, it's time for our European peers to accelerate as the rest of Europe continues to lag behind.

Moving now to gas demand on page 6. In the January-June period, Italian gas demand amounted to 33.1 billion cubic meters.

The 0.4% increase year-on-year was mainly driven by the thermoelectric sector due to lower hydroelectric generation and rising power demand. '26, it is the second year in a row displaying a recovery of volumes, notwithstanding high and volatile prices.

Residential consumption was strongly influenced by weather condition, and overall demand proved to be quite volatile. Export remained broadly stable at around 1 billion cubic meter, mainly through Tarvisio.

Far in Italy, we have not observed any physical disruption to gas flows, as all the Qatari volumes affected by force majeure were effectively replaced by cargoes from alternative geographies, mainly from the US. Looking more broadly at Europe, gas demand across the six largest market has declined by around 1% since the beginning of the year, with the most significant reduction recorded in France and UK.

At the same time, LNG inflows have remained resilient and slight increased overall. Lower LNG import from Qatar has been largely offset by higher volumes from the United States.

Meanwhile, storage levels in Europe, as previously discussed, remain at the lowest point in over the last five years. While physical flows were unaffected, geopolitical uncertainty drove prices volatility.

In order to facilitate the access to updated, trustworthy, and neutral data, I am glad to announce that we have just launched Polaris, Snam's new monthly energy market report, designed to provide investors and stakeholder with a timely, reliable, and data-driven data and analysis on the Italian energy system. Each edition will include key market indicators, gas demand, and supply dynamics and storage trends.

In addition, every quarter, the report will feature an in-depth analysis of different strategic topics, helping to provide context beyond the headlines. Now, I'd like to highlight an important dynamic that we observed during the severe heat wave that affected Europe over the past few weeks on slide number 7.

The data provide a very clear illustration of the role of gas-fired flexible generation plays in maintaining system stability during periods of stress. During the hottest week of June, we observed a significant decline in wind generation, which is a fairly typical pattern during prolonged heat wave conditions.

At the same time, electricity demand remained robust, driven in part by higher cooling needs. Gas-fired power generation stepped in to fill the gap.

In some weeks, gas generation almost doubled, effectively compensating for the lower output from wind. This is an important reminder: gas demand is not only evolving in terms of volumes, but also becoming increasing volatile.

Beyond average consumption level, there are periods where gas is required at very short notice and in significant quantities to offset fluctuations in other sources of generation. On slide number 8, we highlight the key achievements delivered across our industrial growth agenda, which remains the core pillar of our strategy.

Progress has been made across all of our platforms, including natural gas infrastructure, carbon capture and storage, hydrogen, and market solution. Starting with transport, the Adriatic Line Phase 1 is 90% completed, and the first batch of the Seissin-Melbio line entered in operation.

Storage level reached around 67% at the end of June, and are at 75% today, with the 90% filling target before the next winter already secured through the above-mentioned auctions. LNG continues to provide significant volumes and flexibility, accounting for around 32% of total gas imports, with 110 cargoes already delivered to Italy.

Moreover, we sold 40% of Ravenna capacity forward for the next 10 years. Moving now to hydrogen and CCS.

Our projects have been confirmed as project of common interest and project of mutual interest, underscoring their strategic relevance. On the Ravenna CCS project, following the approval of the environmental impact assessment for the first section of the transport network, the permitting process continues to advance.

The environmental impact assessment and the single authorization procedure for the storage phase are currently underway. On biomethane, the binding offer phase has been concluded, confirming strong market interest in the asset.

We are now close to define next step of the process, targeting signing by year-end, with the business to be classified as held for sale. Moving now to page 9, some highlights for the period.

On the regulatory front, the Energy Law Decree has mandated ARERA to define the regulatory framework and the key principle for CCS. The first consultation document for the seventh gas transportation regulatory period was published during the quarter, and we submitted our comments by the June deadline.

There are two months remaining in the observation period for the macroeconomic variables underpinning the '27 WACC market-to-market. Based on the data observed to date and the forward curves today available, regasification appears to be on the edge of activation, excluding France.

However, given the elevated market volatility, we consider still premature to draw definitive conclusions. Moving now to financing.

In June, we successfully issued a dual-tranche European green bond and sustainability-linked bond, and the board of directors today approved a potential USD future issuance, following last year inaugural one. On sustainability, we continue to progress, with sustainable finance reaching 90% of total and Scope 1 and 2 emissions expected to decline by more than 30% versus '22.

We also renewed the gender equality certification for the group. On results, we deliver sound H1 '26 figures, with adjusted EBITDA of €1,572 million, that is up 9% year-on-year driven by organic growth and larger perimeter, when adjusted for the one-off related to 2024 deflator update recovery booked in Q1 '25.

Adjusted net income at €733 million is up 3% year-on-year, net of the above-mentioned one-off, thanks to higher EBITDA, partially counterbalanced by additional depreciation and financial charges. Investments at approximately €1.6 billion include the acquisition control over OLT.

Net debt stood at €18.8 billion, versus 17.5 at the end of '25, after the investment activity carried out during the period, the payment of the dividend, but also the OLT control acquisition and the cash out for Italgas exchangeable refinancing. Net of this non-recurring items related to OLT and Italgas, net debt remained broadly stable, and also the average cost of debt remains stable at 2.6%.

Now, let me hand over to Luca for additional details. Please, Luca.

Thank you, Agostino, and good afternoon, everybody. I am on slide number 11.

Out of the total investment, around 33% refers to the OLT transaction. Considering only technical investments, over 50% are related to the development.

27% of the investment, gross of OLT enterprise value acquisition, are European taxonomy-aligned and include H2-ready replacements, dual-fuel compressor stations, biomethane plant connection, H2 and CCS investment, and a large part of the biomethane capex and energy efficiency, excluding cogeneration. This figure would be 42% excluding OLT.

SDG alignment is calculated only on technical investments, excluding the OLT business combination, and is 52%, of which the majority goes towards SDG 13, 9, and 7, respectively Climate Action, Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, and finally, Affordable and Clean Energy. Let's now move to the EBITDA analysis on slide number 12.

Adjusted EBITDA for the period was €1,572 million, +5% compared to last year and +9% netting the €52 million deflator one-off recognized in the first quarter 2025. The growth is mainly attributable to: regulated revenues increase for about €47 million, mainly related to tariff RAB and output-based growth, partially counterbalanced by fast money effect; perimeter effects related to Stogit Adriatica growth for €8 million that entered into perimeter from March 2025, Ravenna FSRU for €8 million that started operating from May 2025, OLT consolidation for €32 million consolidated from March 2026; on top, revenues from biomethane connections to our network for €10 million.

The slight increase in regulated costs, about €6 million, is mainly attributable to labor cost and new hires. With regards to the market solution businesses, the €10 million EBITDA contribution increase is mainly driven by biomethane, following higher business volumes, and to energy efficiency for energy performance contracts in the public administration segment.

As for the full year 2026 guidance, we confirm adjusted EBITDA to reach around €3.1 billion, driven by RAB growth, OLT consolidation, and the full year contribution of Stogit Adriatica and Ravenna FSRU. Moving to slide 13, our associate portfolio once again demonstrated strong resilience in the first half of 2026, despite the ongoing geopolitical volatility affecting global energy markets.

Overall contribution from associates reached €212 million, up 4% year-on-year. The positive and negative drivers broadly offset each other, highlighting the benefits of a diversified portfolio and its ability to deliver stable earnings even in a challenging market environment.

Let me now walk you through the main movements during the period. Starting with TAP, the asset delivered another very strong performance, supported by the additional 1.2 bcm per year of transport capacity and a continued focus on cost efficiency and financial optimization.

As a result, TAP was the main positive contributor to the portfolio's performance during the period. Looking ahead, we expect its contribution to be more than €15 million above 2025 levels by year-end, driven by both incremental capacity and by a stronger financial profile.

Turning to SeaCorridor, the performance reflected additional revenues during the second quarter, highlighting its role as a major import and diversification route in time of uncertainty in the global LNG markets. Teréga delivered a much stronger second quarter, partially recovering the weaker start of the year, thanks to cost rephasing and some additional bookings.

However, lower cross-border bookings at the Spanish interconnection point are expected to weigh on the full year results. EMG was the only associate directly impacted by the conflict in Iran.

Flows have fully resumed in April and is now running as expected. Finally, among the Italian associates, we recorded a lower contribution from Italgas due to the absence of a regulatory one-off recorded last year, combined with the dilution of our participation to 11.4%.

We expect it to be more than compensated by year-end by the full year contribution of 2i Rete Gas. Building on the excellent performance delivered in the first half, we expect around €365 million contribution from the overall associate portfolio for the full year.

To provide a more detailed view on our associates and better understand of their values, we have included a dedicated section in the appendix of this presentation. Let's now move to the first half 2026 net income analysis on slide number 14.

Adjusted net income for the period was €733 million, -2% compared to first half 2025 and +3% net of the deflator one-off recorded in the first quarter 2025, net of fiscal effect. The trend is attributable to: higher EBITDA, already commented; higher D&A for €45 million following new assets entering into operation and perimeter effects related to Stogit Adriatica, Ravenna FSRU, and the OLT consolidation; net financial expenses increased due to higher average net debt, with an average net cost of debt substantially stable at approximately 2.6% compared to 2.5% in the same period of 2025; higher contribution from associates for €8 million as a result of higher international associates for €10 million, counterbalanced by a decrease of €2 million in the Italian associates; finally, higher income taxes due to the increase in the IRAP rate.

As for the full year guidance, we confirm an adjusted net income above €1,450 million, which reflect the EBITDA performance, partially counterbalanced by higher D&A and higher net financial expenses. It includes around €40 million of IRAP increase related to the Energy Decree.

Turning now to the cash flow on slide number 15. Cash flow from operation for the period amounted to around €1,832 million and was the result of €1,232 million of funds from operation and about €600 million of positive working capital.

The change in working capital was mainly driven by about €400 million of tariff-related items, mainly related to the additional tariff components, and about €200 million of Superbonus fiscal credit decrease. Net investments for the period amounted to €1,154 million, including the cash out related to the OLT transaction net of cash acquired.

Outflows were mainly related to the payment of the dividend for €1,004 million. On top of that, we accounted the impact of the Italgas bond refinancing for €432 million, while other items are largely attributable to the OLT debt consolidation, resulting in a change in net debt of about €1,294 million, of which €913 million of non-recurring transaction related to OLT and Italgas.

As for the full year 2026, we expect the change in working capital to remain broadly stable at around €600 million. The unwind of tariff-related items should be substantially offset by further reduction in the Ecobonus receivables and by the positive working capital effect stemming from the disposal of a portion of the gas volumes acquired in 2022 under the strategic storage scheme earmarked for the liquidity corridor.

Moving to slide number 16. Net debt at the end of June stood at approximately €18.8 billion.

The average cost of debt remained broadly stable at 2.6%, while the fixed-to-floating mix stood at 65%-35%. This reflects a tactical rebalancing towards floating rate exposures aimed at preserving flexibility and optionality for future refinancing opportunities in a still volatile interest rate environment, as well as in the view of the upcoming new WACC period starting in 2028.

Sustainable finance reached 90% of committed financing, up 5% versus December 2025 closing. Following the refinancing in January of the €500 million exchangeable bond into Italgas shares, we completed in June a dual-tranche transaction consisting of a 4-year European green bond and a 10-year sustainability-linked bond for €750 million each.

In parallel, we secured approximately €1.2 billion of additional bilateral bank facilities, and we signed a second tranche with the European Investment Bank for €124 million to finance the biomethane connection projects. In addition, we strengthened our liquidity profile and funding flexibility by extending and upsizing our core sustainability-linked revolving credit facility to €5.1 billion.

Our credit profile further improved during the period. Moody's upgraded Snam to Baa1 with stable outlook.

Fitch reaffirmed BBB+ with stable outlook, highlighting metrics close to a single-A category. Finally, S&P confirmed the A- rating, while improving the outlook from negative to stable.

Overall, these developments confirm the strength of our sound investment-grade profile. As for the full year 2026, we upgrade our net debt guidance from the previous €19 billion to 18.9, mainly thanks to the expected better working capital evolution.

With that, I concluded, and I will hand over to Agostino for the closing remarks.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Luca.

I'm now on slide 18 for my conclusion. Natural gas plays a key role in the Italian integrated energy system.

It remains the country's largest primary energy source, while also supporting around half of domestic electricity generation. In this specific context, security of supply is the main priority.

Through our infrastructure, we contribute to national energy security in two key ways: first, providing in a highly flexible and diversified system where pipelines and LNG terminal work together to ensure access to multiple sources and routes of supply. In recent years, LNG has evolved from a complementary source into a structural component of Italian energy mix, significantly strengthening the system resilience.

Second, by supporting the timely replenishment of our gas storage facilities. As said, today our storage sites are around 70% full, well ahead of the European average, with the 90% level for next winter already contracted.

While this is not by itself a guarantee against all potential challenges in the coming season, it is certainly the right place to start. In the first half of the year, we delivered across all our priorities and advanced the execution of our clear strategy.

This is translating into a strong financial performance, underpinned by the strength, visibility, and stability of our regulated business model. Looking ahead, we confirm that we are fully on track to achieve our 2026 financial targets, while improving our net debt outlook, reflecting, once again, our continued focus on financial discipline, balance sheet strength, and long-term flexibility.

With that, we are now happy to take your live questions. Thank you very much for your attention.

Hi, thank you for the presentation and also for the additional disclosure on the associates. That's kind of interesting to see.

Just had a couple of questions. Firstly, on the seventh regulatory period consultation document, just wondering whether you had any thoughts on that, does that seem to be kind of heading in a similar direction to current regulation, or are there any major changes that are worth highlighting?

Then secondly, on TAP, obviously seen quite a nice step up in profitability this year based on the expansion that you've done. Are there any more opportunities for expansion of the TAP pipeline?

Could we see another one in a few years, or is it kind of maxed out now in terms of where you can get to? Thank you very much.

James,

thank you very much. On consultation document, the ARERA, that was the new board recently appointed, started the consultation around the seventh regulatory period, and they published half May, on the 14th of May, the relative consultation document.

We see both positive elements and also area of attention about that. A key positive aspect is that they propose a simplification of the ROSS framework, which could reduce fast-slow money volatility through the application of the current capitalization rate.

There are of course areas of attention that are related to the potential increase in gearing that use in the WACC formula, which ARERA consider more consistent with our current leverage profile. On this point, of course, we have a very different view regarding the methodology to be used to calculate the leverage ratio, and therefore we have submitted all our comments.

That is, let me say, the standard process in this consultation framework. There is another point of attention that is the potential revision of the remuneration of work in progress, and again, we submitted our observation on this, given that we consider the remuneration of work in progress a structural element of the remuneration profile of an infrastructure player as we are.

There are a lot of other details that are under discussion. We do expect that authority will adopt a final resolution in the first quarter of '27.

We just had a public hearing from the authority, we were yesterday with them. Let me say, on top of the standard, let me say, negotiational approach that you have to take each time there is a new board that is trying to introduce a new regulatory framework, let me appreciate the spirit of transparent, proactive cooperation among the different parties.

We have taken difficult decision with the authority and with the Ministry of Energy this year. I've mentioned what we did on storage.

I think that this is an important element of the discussion. Of course, we will do our job in negotiating as best as we can all the regulatory, let me say, tools, but we will do that in the spirit of cooperation, having clear in mind that our main task is to ensure security of supply and energy security to the country.

On TAP expansion, please Luca.

James, on TAP, TAP is obliged to conduct market tests basically on expansion of the capacity every year. We did the test last year, which didn't provide any binding, let me say, request for additional capacity.

However, we're starting with a binding market test in the first quarter of 2027, which has four level of potential long-term capacity if clearly are requested by the market. This will be level 1, which is 1 bcm additional, level 2, which is 2 bcm, level 3, which is 3.6 bcm, and finally level 4 for 7.4 bcm, with operations to basically be in place by 2031-2032.

Clearly, we will expect next year to understand whether there is additional need for additional capacity.

Great. Thank you very much.

Hi everyone. Three questions from me as well.

The first one is a question on the European context. The question for the CEO would be: how do you see the security of the European gas system ahead of the winter season?

I know that is a very broad question, but just interesting to see from your perspective the difficulties the European natural gas supply may be facing ahead of the next winter season. That would be the first question.

The second question is a follow-up on your latest views on the impact on the company and its profitability from the implementation of the full ROSS system or the full ROSS framework from 2028. The third question is if you can update us on where we are in the definition of the CCS framework, instrumental for the capex acceleration on that area, and if significant discussion with ARERA or any feedback from the regulator would be appreciated.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Javier, for your question. Let me say, I think that we did properly our part of the job accumulating storage capacity for the coming winter.

As I said before, this is important for our national balance, but of course it's not enough to solve the European problem. The European problem can be solved only with the cooperation of all other involved countries.

Having said that, we see that there is a lot of physical flexibility on gas market. There are huge amount of volumes increasingly available, mainly from the US.

In normal condition, we don't see any physical constraint. The problem is that we are not in a standard framework, no?

We are in the middle of a war. We were expecting the war ended somewhere before summer.

It is not the case. Normally, we do expect for sure additional price volatility and, let me say, potential price pressure given that at a certain point in time, the other countries they must accelerate on storage refilling for next winter.

For sure we see potential pressure on price. I think that flows will be enough.

Again, my statement is related to a standard framework. We are not in a standard framework, we cannot exclude that in case of, let me say, escalation of the conflict and also extension of the conflict, something could also affect in terms of physical availability.

We are not there for the moment. Luca, on ROSS implementation, please.

When it comes to the full ROSS implementation, I need to basically refer you still to the publication of what ARERA did back in August 2025, which is basically the bonus-malus mechanism that has been provided officially to operators and to the market, whereby we submit a four-year industrial plan of the company, which is part of our 10-year development plan, and there is a bonus-malus incentive mechanism that correct for capex estimate. Basically, you have an incentive of 0.3% on actual capex if the capex is lower of 1% versus the baseline submitted.

There is no incentive in case the deviation is between 1% and 5%, and there is a malus of 10% of the difference in case of a deviation of more than 5%. Now, as this applies to the years 2026 and 2027, but will not affect basically remuneration.

Now, in the latest consultation around the seventh regulatory period regarding basically the potential evolution to ROSS, they only mentioned the possibility of simplify the fast and slow mechanism, basically de-connecting from the five-year average that has been introduced in 2024, that for us would be clearly beneficial. I cannot give you any impact as of now because it's very difficult.

I can only refer you that in the first half of this year, we actually had a negative impact on the fast and slow money effect because clearly we have evolution when it comes to the growth and decrease of investment year-on-year, applying the five-year average, this has a negative impact.

Regarding evolution of the CCUS framework, we confirm that the government assigned to ARERA the responsibility to define a regulatory framework for CCUS, and we confirm that on the basis of the information that we have access to, this regulatory framework will be based on the same principle that today is applied for natural gas.

Interesting. Thank you.

Thank you very much, and good afternoon, and thank you for the presentation. A few questions from my side, or more like topics to discuss.

Firstly, I would like to start with your let's call it relatively bullish on the gas demand, and I have two questions related to that. In your modeling, what do you assume will happen to gas demand coming from gas-fired power plants once Italy deploys all the batteries they want to deploy?

As you can imagine, there's quite a lot being under construction and will be under construction in the country. Secondly, I know it's not a discussion point today about the stranded asset risk, but we are wondering according to today's regulation and regulatory framework, what happens to a gas asset which is stranded?

Is it somehow compensated via the regulatory recovery mechanism, or is it the cost you are going to fully cover? That would be kind of the first topic.

The second topic will be on your fixed-floating cost strategy. Firstly, you can maybe provide us a difference between your fixed cost level and floating cost level right now, what is the benefit of moving more into the floating costs?

Consequently, also, how do you compare it with your allowed cost of debt? What is the potential outperformance you are getting from the fact that you are moving towards having more floating debt on your book?

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Bartek. Regarding your first question, maybe we could organize a time-based panel to provide the proper answer to that.

I think that it is not correct to talk about bullish expectation on gas demand. This is not the message we want to address.

The message that we want to address is that in a framework of energy integration system, you will need a certain amount of gas to provide energy flexibility, stabilization services that others are not able to provide. We have seen an increase in our gas consumption in June.

We see an increase of gas consumption in July, +7% up to today. Let's see what will be, let me say, the conclusion at the end of the month.

It's huge. The reason why we have such a huge increase is that there are some unexpected factor.

There is a heat wave taking place in Italy while we are talking now. There is lack in hydroelectric generation, and there is someone that need to fill the gap.

Gas is there to fill that gap. Today, we see a massive increase of national consumption, and maybe next month, we will see something different.

At the very end, we will need a certain amount of different sources covering a flexible and variable demand that will depend from a lot of elements. In these different fluctuations, the role of gas is to compensate, is to be there in any case to provide the final resource to keep the energy system stable.

This, of course, should have impacts in term of remuneration. Just to comment what you said on batteries, we are talking of different things.

We cannot compare the role of batteries and the role of flexible generation fleet. Batteries will provide and already provide excellent real-time services, super short-term services.

They could provide a lot of services for some hours, not in that. Batteries are not a source.

Batteries are only a way to transfer, let me say, power toward different timing, but they are not producing anything. They are simply releasing something that has been produced by someone else with some technology.

It's not a source. What you need is a stable source of energy.

Of course, this should have impacts in term of remuneration. What we think about this.

We consider that the more you enter in an energy integration framework, the more distributed, domestic, private, volatile, renewable you will put in the system, the more you will need a central, let me say, regulated long-term stabilizing element that for sure will be composed also by gas generation fleet, including the role of the grids, the electricity grid and the gas grids. As said other times and also during the business plan presentation, I'm not afraid to say that in the long term, the regulated principle of remuneration on invested capital that today we apply on the grid infrastructure should be applied in a similar way also to flexible generation.

On your second question, Bartek, regarding fixed to floating, please Luca. As you have seen, we have decreased the amount of fixing from the 75% to 65%, and there is just for basically this part of the year.

The reason is very simple: we see an arbitrage currently between the floating rate curve as well as the fixed rate longer term, and therefore we took the advantage. The impact on our, basically, financial expenses is a reduction in the region between 10 and €12 million for the full year.

Now, by year-end, you will see our threshold of fixing going back closer to 75%, which is our overall target over our basically asset liability management strategy. Now, this is not only in terms of fixed to floating, but also in terms of duration.

The closer we get to a new WACC regulatory period, the less the duration is required from our liability side. Therefore, also in terms of duration, we are shorter in the region of 0.5 years vis-à-vis before.

Now, in terms of financial expected for the full year, notwithstanding an higher average net debt for the full year and the new guidance at 18.9, we confirm our guidance for financial expenses of €335 million for the full year, which is a combination of higher financial expenses on debt for €30 million and higher financial expenses not from debt for about €27 million.

Thank you. If I may, if you don't mind, to follow up on the point number one, and especially if we can maybe touch base this stranded asset regulation, whether there is anything in place in Italy or not, meaning if let's say a pipe is stranded, who takes the cost of the depreciation which has not been kind of recognized yet?

Thank you.

Bartek, there is no policy in place, but so far, never we have an asset that has been declared stranded by the regulator. Actually, as you might recall, we presented an hydraulic studies of the expectation in terms of load factor of the infrastructure also for 2030 and 2040, and we are talking of a utilization of the infrastructure in terms of available capacity which is north of 90%.

Therefore, if you take into account this utilization factor vis-à-vis other type of infrastructure that today provides energy, I think that the difference is [clear?] .

You could have some surprise.

Exactly. There is no mechanism in place.

Thank you, and apologies for taking so long. Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Good afternoon, and thank you for taking my question. I've got two questions, please.

The first one is you've highlighted data centers, electrification, and potential Russian gas displacement as potential drivers of Italian future gas demand. At what point do you see your existing LNG storage and transmission infrastructure becoming constrained, if at all?

Could that require investment and RAB growth above your current plan, which I believe is €41.3 billion of RAB in 2035? The second question is storage.

You're highlighting the storage is strategic. I think Javier asked a question earlier about is Europe going to go short this winter, and I think there is some nervousness here.

Clearly you're in a good position. If storage is such strategic asset, do you think you are achieving an adequate remuneration for the importance of them?

Thank you.

Thank you very much. If you let me start from the second one, of course if you ask me if I'm happy with the remuneration that I currently have, the answer is always no, even that is our job to extract the maximum remuneration that we can from our asset.

Honestly, I have to say that we consider the remuneration scheme applied to the storage facilities that we have as adequate. Of course, we will try to insist on this with ARERA in the coming months, including also with an important regulatory aspect that is related to LNG.

Our grid was composed for several years by pipes. At a certain point in time, we started to manage also storage, that received a remuneration scheme similar to pipes.

Recent years, we started with LNG. On LNG, we have a real issue, given that remuneration on LNG is capped at 64%.

There is a limit on the principle of guarantee that we want to remove, given that LNG is not anymore a commercial option. If you look at the figure we've presented today, 32% of the total flows are coming from LNG terminals.

They're not options, they are mandatory and long-term need for the system. That's why we are asking for a long-term stable and visible 100% remuneration on our LNG terminals.

As far as the €41.3 billion of RAB, this do not include any capacity addition nor on LNG nor on storage, which clearly will be a discussion for the next update of the business plan at the beginning of next year. Yeah.

If you look which is the evolution of the system, you mentioned data centers that will have a massive impact on final consumption, and if you look at the consumption profile of a data center, maybe it's not so digital. It's something maybe close to an industrial consumption scheme.

It's more to a steel industry or cement industry. It's not data, it's not in light, let me say, not in digital, something really heavy.

To provide that amount of energy with that consumption profile, you will need a baseload source. Today in Italy, a baseload source could be considered hydro, that it is what it is, could be nuke, that is out of the game as today.

We hope that it will be re-entering the game soon, but it will take years. The only remaining one is gas.

That's why, for sure, the more data center we will include in the country, the more baseload generation we will have to provide to them.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my questions.

The first one is if you can give us an update on the asset rotation, more specifically on the disposal of the biomethane unit. Secondly, more general questions about the increase we have seen in interest yields and corporate bond costs, I wonder whether compared to the assumptions of the business plan, whether this changes something in terms of your capex plan or whether there is a flexibility within your plan to address potentially this increase in costs.

Thank you.

Thank you. On the asset rotation, in particular the biomethane basically disposal process, as mentioned by Agostino before, we concluded as of yesterday the second phase, which was to receive binding offers for multiple interested parties.

We will compare basically these offers in the coming days and activate the final phase for the process, which see us concluding or signing, let me say, the disposal by the end of 2026, this year. For the rest of the asset rotation, as you might recall, those include different type of assets, and as always, when it comes to M&A, you will see announcement first of comments from the management.

Therefore, we're working on several topic, and you will be informed when we announce the closing of some of these transaction. Everything is progressing according to plan.

We have five years to execute our asset rotation program. As far as the second questions, interest rate increase, this do not affect our net financial expenses as I commented to one of your colleagues in a call previously for this year.

Clearly might affect the evolution of our interest rate expenses for the remainder of the business plan, which we'll update again at the beginning of next year. However, we've been managing our issuance pretty actively and having an average cost of funding into the market, which has been in the region of 3.5%, if you think that five-year average in terms of swap rate are just shy of 3%, therefore just 50 basis points in terms of credit spreads.

As you probably seen, we also got authorization to issue in the US market, which is something we might consider for the remainder of this year or the beginning of next year. Then on top of interest rates, we should comment on inflation.

Clearly inflation is higher than our assumption in the business plan, especially for the first two years of the plan, i.e. 2026 and 2027.

This might have a positive impact when it comes to RAB revaluation in the region of €30 million, which are not at the moment part of our business plan.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for listening. As usual, the investor relations team is available for any follow-up questions.

Thank you. Good afternoon.