[LIVE] Patrick Pouyanné, CEO of the TotalEnergies group | ESSEC Tuesdays / LCP - 10/02/2026

I will kill a myth. The myth is rugby. I like rugby but I was very tall when I was young, not very strong. In college we always played rugby and I hated ending up in the mud. My real sport was tennis. So there is an error. The rest is generally good. I would say 19/20. And you told me that one of your inspirations was McEnroe. So there you go, consistent: McEnroe, tennis, stubborn and stubborn but intelligent. Thank you.

Yes, since it's the second time I come to see you. You see, I like the ESS. Except that my wife worked and studied here in part. You didn't see that. So it's a good reason to come back. Thank you very much. If I come back in 8 years, I might no longer be CEO of TotalEnergies.

Oh, that starts strong tonight. I would have preferred to end with these beautiful questions. But I think what employees expect, and I experienced it during the Covid crisis, is that when everything becomes complicated, you need to give clear directions. So first, you need to have clear ideas yourself because bandwidth is low. Even with my executive committee, they capture about 70% of what I say, and it decreases as you go down. So you need to simplify and give non-contradictory axes. That's an art of management. Second, leadership is also showing a certain way of behaving. I have a motto inherited from my father: 'Where there's a will, there's a way.' I always try to show my colleagues that when you want, you can. For example, last week there was a crisis with the company accounts. We finalized them today with the auditors. The CFO said it wasn't going well, they wanted us to do something. I said let's stay, if it's not good, we'll convince them otherwise. And we did. So you always have to show engagement and set an example. Third, my way of working is always the same idea: you have to face realities and force people to express themselves. When you're number one, you're not normal in the eyes of your collaborators. They won't tell you everything. So you need to encourage them to have confidence, to listen, and then make decisions that aren't completely stupid.

No, everyone has their style. I have a simple philosophy: if the board chose me to lead the company, it's not to correct my defects at 55. It's because they considered I had certain qualities. I think it's better to bet on your qualities than to try to correct your defects. People knew who I was. No surprise. I can be rough, but I also have a real capacity for emotion. I'm a character. If I were really impossible, they would have fired me. But there is no perfect boss. You shouldn't try to copy a model. You need to understand your limits, look in the mirror, know who you are, and play on your qualities. Be yourself, but with talent.

I can't reveal secrets, but first, I find negotiations amusing. It's the fun part of my job. Recently, we embarked on a deal with Daniel Kretinsky to buy half of all gas plants in Europe. We found ourselves one evening in a hotel room negotiating. It was emotional on both sides. But we both wanted to do the deal. There were strong tensions because it was a 10 billion operation. Each 100 million mattered. But we found solutions because we wanted to do it. I think difficult negotiations bring people closer. One of my first negotiations was in Qatar as young CEO of the subsidiary. We had to negotiate with authorities how much of the cake they would give us. The negotiation started at 99% for Qatar, 1% for us. There were moments of tension. At one point they found me rude. In the end, I got 93-7. But it required some crises. Today, I am probably the best friend of the Qatari minister, who also grew. So you create bonds in these negotiations. If you overcome difficulties, it's a success for both parties, and there is satisfaction, even enjoyment. I am known in the oil world as the Total CEO who negotiates many things himself.

I don't know about influence. I discovered when I became CEO of TotalEnergies 10 years ago that nothing I said was neutral. One day, as a young CEO, I was on the radio and was asked about the state intervening in Renault's capital. I answered with common sense: I think the state should let companies be managed by their bosses. I received a call from the then Minister of Economy, who later became President, telling me to be careful. I said no, I said what I think. So I realized everything I said could have an impact. To answer your question, today in France, it's complicated because it's not our role. My role is not to call for voting for X or Y. I will never do that. I have 100,000 employees and I respect that each is free. It's out of the question for me to take a political stance. However, a business leader can intervene in public debate on economic matters that I know. I won't enter political debates, but I can explain how investment decisions are made. I recently did interviews on LCI. I think we need to speak up because there is a competition between countries, and even as a French boss, I have to look at what's happening. I see in polls that more and more French people don't trust politicians, which is a shame, and they turn to business leaders as compasses. What we must avoid is falling into political correctness. We have a voice to say things simply. The budget debate in parliament was surreal, with many economic nonsense. So we need to intervene because I wouldn't want the country to sink into policies like 1981. It took 30 years to recover. So we need to share simple messages. The voice of business leaders can help. But being a politician is a job, not mine. I respect that it's complicated to find consensus with a fragmented parliament. But we must contribute to keeping feet on the ground.

When I express myself, I do so in my own name but also based on what I believe. People who know me know I am authentic. That doesn't mean I will say things contrary to my company. I live for the company. Being CEO, you represent and embody it. You live for it, but you love it. It's a great pleasure to be CEO of TotalEnergies. So that influences everything, but it doesn't mean I won't speak out. When I recently said that business leaders should engage in dialogue with all political parties in a democracy, it was more the citizen Patrick Pouyanné speaking than the CEO.

What I said in that interview is that I think it's not up to elites to decide what is good or bad. We are on the wrong track. The more elites decide what is bad, the more we push French people to look at extremes. I simply said that on the economic side, when I hear debates in parliament, I am worried about the paths the country might take if those parties come to power. It's not for me to decide; the French will decide. I think it's time not to ostracize them because that only makes things worse. We need to engage in demanding dialogue, and I suggested it be done collectively by employer organizations rather than individually. There is a game in the media now to find out which boss met Marine Le Pen or Jordan Bardella, as if there were a witch hunt. That's not possible. I claim the freedom to meet anyone. That doesn't mean I endorse them. Since my interview, I expected a wave of reactions, but there was none. I think we need to move towards more normality. That doesn't mean the citizen will vote for one of the extremes. It means we must contribute. As CEO of TotalEnergies, I don't want to be nationalized one day by people with strange ideas.

No, your information is wrong because I actually chaired Entreprises pour l'Environnement in 2025. As your colleague mentioned in my background, I started working on environmental issues. I even participated in the first COP in Berlin as part of the French delegation. So these issues have always interested me. Some say it's not true, but it is. I am constantly looking for ways to progress. If I took on the presidency, it was not obligatory; it was taking more risk than gain. NGOs said 'What is this?' But it was to send a strong internal signal. At that time, we had decided to change Total to TotalEnergies, shift strategy towards more electricity and renewables, and promote sustainable development. By doing this, I sent a strong internal signal that it was important. I also made sure that within the association, working groups were created across different business functions to progress on sustainable development. It was a signal internally. I gave time to the association. It obliges you to reflect. For example, we engaged in studies on what a France moving towards net zero 2050 would mean. So it was a commitment consistent with a progress approach for the company and for myself.

I need to go into the energy and climate world a bit more. Honestly, if someone had told me in 2015 when I became CEO that I would one day change the company name and convince the board to build an electricity business, I wouldn't have signed. It wasn't clear at all. But 2015 was the Paris Agreement, and we started asking many questions. Total was a company driven by supply. We looked for oil, and when you find it, you put it on the world market and you're sure to find customers. You don't ask many questions about demand. LNG is similar. What changed with Paris is that we suddenly wondered if that demand was necessarily there. I lived 20 years in the company saying oil demand grows. But then we started talking about electric vehicles and technologies that could change things. So we began looking at the world from the demand side. We asked: at what rate will oil continue to grow? There are always peaks, but the world is more complicated. One common point in all scenarios is that electricity grows significantly. So we thought: should we leave the company on oil and gas markets that may not grow by 2030-2040? Energy is long-term, so we need to start moving. I could have stayed comfortable in my shoes, but the most complicated decision I ever made was whether to diversify. It wasn't a negotiation with myself. There were two motivations: one, we can make electricity from gas, so there is an economic logic to extend the gas value chain. Two, we needed to enter decarbonization. A key motivation was my employees. One day, I had lunch with young drillers who asked, 'What will we do in 10 years?' That question forced me to reflect. If my collaborators are wondering about their future, we need to move. When I announced Total becoming TotalEnergies and that we would do other energies, that question disappeared. We gave a future to all our employees. Internal surveys showed support for the strategy jumped from 65-70% to over 80%. I did it largely for them. In a company, it's the men and women who work every day who create success. If they question their future, we would have recruitment and motivation problems. So we took the step to diversify into electricity and renewables. It wasn't a given. I told the board: if we do it, we must do it big, not just a few solar farms as an alibi. Big means that by 2030, electricity and renewables should represent 20% of the energy we produce. Starting from zero, we are halfway there, at 10%. It's not simple because when you diversify, you can make mistakes. We bought many companies, not all were good.

Not exactly what we wanted. But we have significant financial resources, so I must continue oil and gas to finance renewables. Stakeholders saw a contradiction, but I don't have a magic wand. The cash from oil and gas funds our energy transition. That's the company's DNA: adding renewables consistently while maintaining the core business.

We announced it in 2021, not 2020. Our goal is carbon neutrality together with society. We track carbon intensity, which has dropped 18% in ten years. The path is adding more biofuels and renewables. By 2030, a 25% reduction. By 2050, the company would be 50% electricity, 25% decarbonized fuels, and some oil and gas. The transition takes time. Customers want sustainable energy but aren't ready to pay more. We need public policies. Look at Stellantis pulling back from electric cars because customers find them too expensive.

We will get there. Investment in renewables is 25-30%, not 10%. Energy is long-term; demand is growing from 6 billion people. We aim to stabilize oil, grow gas to complement renewables, and expand renewables. We'll have 34 GW renewable capacity by 2025. We're determined to reach 20% by 2030. But we must keep shareholders satisfied with dividends. Look at BP: they moved too fast and are backtracking. We find the right balance.

They have it. Short-term returns are there.

TotalEnergies yields 5.5% dividend, unchanged for 40 years. We'll increase it. Short and long term are compatible through good management. If I asked for no dividends for five years, I'd lose my job. Among European oil companies that committed to renewables, we are the only one still pursuing it because we kept oil and gas to fund it.

Yes, 20%. Beyond that, shareholders find it hard to quantify. In 2020, we made all managers judged on two equal KPIs: production and emissions. When they saw it was real, they found many low-cost ways to cut emissions. Over five years, we reduced operational emissions by about 40%. The most expensive measure was $30 per ton. It's about directing the company's focus.

Read the judgment. The judge didn't say our communication was false. He asked us to remove three paragraphs from a commercial website about 'together with society' because it wasn't clear to consumers. We removed them and didn't appeal because we understand the need to be more precise. It's a lesson to better express our ambition.

We're discussing with the board. By 2025, some scientists say 1.5°C is out of reach, but we don't give up. Legal definitions of net zero are complex. Our strategy won't change: continue growing renewable electricity.

No, it's profitable.

My renewable electricity business makes 10% return, same as my LNG business.

Not necessarily. Solar alone is intermittent and has no value. Our strategy combines solar with wind, gas, batteries, and customers. The entire electricity chain is profitable. In the US, we pair solar with batteries to avoid negative prices. Subsidized solar gives low returns, but that's not the same as producing energy.