Fremmedkapital og risikotagning på fornybar energi - et bankperspektiv

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Fremmedkapital og risikotagning på fornybar energi - et bankperspektiv"

Matthew Gabriel Warren
7 years ago
Views:

1 Fremmedkapital og risikotagning på fornybar energi - et bankperspektiv Det grønne gullet Enovakonferansen 2012 Trondheim, januar 2012 Hans Jacob Bull-Berg Director Nordea Export and Project Finance hans.jacob.bull-berg@nordea.com

2 Nordea has a proven track record within Renewables Finance. Wind Power Nordea builds on a long Danish tradition of financing key DK suppliers, corporate power producers and DANIDA projects in Emerging Markets Proven Project Finance track record: 40 MW Havøygavlen, Norway (Arctic Wind) (w/nib) MW Tooma Tuulepark, Estonia (w/seb) MW Høg-Jæren EnergiPark, Norway (w/ing, EKF) 2010 and 2012 Solar Power Nordea finances key N suppliers and their exports through GIEK insured projects Proven Project Finance track record: 40 MW Scatec Solar, Czech Republic (w/eksportfinans) 2011

3 Innovation & technology development Process - «Technological revolutions and waves of creative distruction are associated with - New ventures - The destruction of mature firms - The failure of numerous startups» The role of finance: Harvard Business School Working Paper, December «A critical element in technological evolutions is the external investors willing to fund new firm formation even though many will fail» Harvard Business School Working Paper, December

4 Phases of technology development and finance Incubation in research Reseach funding, public and private Early commercialization phase Investors («Gründere») - Innovasjon Norge Mid comm. phase Larger investor base incl. venture capital Enova Transition phase Increasing investor base (IPO?) high yield bond finance, structured bank financing Mature technology and established market position structured and corporate bank financing, as well as bond financing 4

5 Wind Power Project Finance main operational/cash Flow risks Turbine Wind Power price Elcert price Debt Service Cash Flow Sponsor Operations and Maintenance Agreement (O&M) Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) or price hedging strategy committed Interest rates & Covenants Profit Net/connections Legal issues like: concession, permits, etc. Level of debt is determined by the predictability of the debt service ability thus accurate cash flow estimates are very important for both debt service and the profitability considerations. 5

6 Project or Non-Recourse Financing the major parties Sponsor(s) Equity Contractor Debt 2-3 Contractors, (time-certain, price-fixed contact types) Public entities Concession, permits, etc. Buyer Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) or a committed hedging strategy Operator Operations and Maintenance Agreement (O&M) With Project Finance it is important that Banks are involved at an early stage of the project. 6

7 The main risks in a Wind Power financing A. Credit Risks on Sponsors and project Parties B. Wind Resource Risk C. Equipment Risk (pre- and post Completion) D. Price Risk E. Financial Risk F. Political and Legal Risk

8 General guidelines for wind power A. Credit risk on sponsors and key project parties Reputable sponsors with industrial experience Fully funded business plan equity paid in or irrevocably committed B. Wind resource risk Wind studies are key (minimum 1 year of data, preferably two years) Estimation of Annual Energy Production figures Verified by independent engineer (IE) on behalf of the bank Volume risk (power curve) Technology-related (availability of each WTG?) Wind risk (how will the wind blow?)

Wind Power Project Finance Wind risk 20,0 % Estimated normal production versus actial production (various wind parks in Norway) 10,0 % 0,0 % -10,0 % 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010-20,0 % -30,0 %

9 Wind Power Project Finance Wind risk 20,0 % Estimated normal production versus actial production (various wind parks in Norway) 10,0 % 0,0 % -10,0 % ,0 % -30,0 % -40,0 % -50,0 % Source: NVE, Nordea research Source: Moody`s research Breezing Past 50 Moody s survey of 34 US onshore wind projects - median energy production was approximately 9 % below expected case 9

10 General guidelines for wind power C. Technical risk (pre- and post completion) Reputable turbine supplier with proven technology WTG (experience, financial strength, power curve, track record) Construction risks: Preferably turn-key, fixed price, date certain, EPC contract, or Sponsor Guarantee Buffer for cost overruns Independent Engineer to sign off progress and successful completion Operational risks: Warranty and service agreement from turbine supplier, incl. availability guarantee (the longer the better) All-risk insurance, including business interruption Maintenance reserve account Operatons and Maintenance Agreement (O&M)

11 General guidelines for wind power D. Price risk with respect to electricity and ElCert Long-term Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) / ElCert Purchase Agreement with creditworthy off-taker Substantial portion of price risk should be hedged Maturity equal to, or longer than, loan maturity Fixed price, preferably inflation adjusted (with escalator) Market price secured by market instruments Nord Pool instruments (maximum 5 years possible) Zero cost collar, defining a price floor and a price ceiling, the price moving within this tunnel Other commodity market derivatives, some of which may also cover volume risk

12 ENOVA support vs. elcertificates Øre/KWh 300,0 Enova support versus present value of elcertificates 30 Øre 250,0 27,5 Øre 200,0 150,0 100,0 25 Øre 22,5 Øre 20 Øre 17,5 Øre 15 Øre 12,5 Øre 10 Øre Average Enova support ,2 Øre/KWh 50,0 7,0 % 7,5 % 8,0 % 8,5 % 9,0 % 9,5 % 10,0 % 10,5 % 11,0 % 11,5 % 12,0 % WACC (pre tax discount rate) The Enova support was an upfront payment and regarded as equity by Banks. The Elcert system will require more up front equity from the investor 12

13 General guidelines for wind power E. Financial risk Strong DSCR in base case based on projected cash flow (P-75 production assumption) (min. DSCR > 1.3) Tenor and repayment period Debt Service Reserve Account (6 months) Hedging of interest rate Hedging of FX exposure F. Political and legal risk: must be acceptable

14 Wind Power Project Finance Lenders Perspectives 2011 KPMG s conclusions on Lenders major financing preconditions: PPA in place, i.e. limited appetite for merchant risk, minimum PPA for a majority of output for a period in excess of 10 years Quality EPC turnkey contract (Nordea: in wind, 2-3 suppliers acceptable) In addition to: Good relationship with a credible management Solid Sponsor(s) Stable and credible regulation. and. construction risk a concern for off-shore wind In line with Nordea s Reneables Credit Principles with additional concerns like; proven technology with reputable suppliers, mitigation of construction risk, comprehensive wind survey etc. Bankable if there is a solid and predictable cash generating ability 14

15 Trends we see in the market... Maturities again down below 10 years. Exceptionally, we have see maturities above 10 years in the market, when Sponsors, Projects and Relationships are strong Normally, for sub-investment grade projects, we see: Amortizing structures of up to 15 years Bank commitments with refinancing / repricing clauses after 5 10 years, i.e. soft bullet structures Additionally, price step-up s Many banks lending capacity is impaired i.e. the number of banks doing Project Finance has diminished. We see: More Club Deals Nordic banks seldom take and hold meur 50 or larger deals alone Selected international banks within Project and also Export Finance are present in the Nordic (less so in the Baltic) market Increased use of external funding vehicles, such as: Exporting state financial institutions like Eksportfinans (N), FEC (F), SEK (S) and EKF (DK) IFI s (International Financial Institutions) like NIB

16 Trends we see in the market... Banks want tighter structures Banks put priority on highly rated customers and Relationship. We see that Project Sponsors respond: Return to pressure for Completion guarantees or Standby Equity from Sponsors Sponsors offer dividend restrictions, 50/50 cash sweep and higher predictability of cash flow i.e. PPA s are on the way back and thereby securing funding and lowering finance costs Prices are up, as financial resources are scarce, keeping in mind that most Project Financings are non-investment grade, it is clear that prices are up at bp and above

17 Conclusions Technologically or marketwise immature business cases do not fly for bank financing, be it structured or corporate Banks therefore need to find solutions for the Projects and customers they serve: Pre-completion risk mitigation (high class contractors, guarantees, maybe even EPC) Sponsor support (higher equity, completion guarantees, guarantees until certain attained financial performance, dividend restrictions, etc.) Export Credit Agency guarantees and/or tapping into external funding sources Financing structures with soft bullet/price step-ups only the strongest projects currently attract financing - sponsor support, relationship to the bank and credit quality are essential

18 Project financing team and credentials EPF in Nordea has an extensive competence and knowledge in financing of wind parks The EPF wind team Hans Jacob Bull-Berg, EPF Oslo Deal Manager Henrik Brink, EPF Copenhagen Head of Wind Energy Juha Sulkanen, EPF Helsinki Deal Manager Niclas Ringblom, EPF Stockholm Deal Manager Selected transactions Borrower Country Nordea role Sign ed VindIn Sweden Arranger 2011 Arise Windpower, Idhult Sweden Arranger 2011 TuuliWatti Finland Arranger 2011 Wallenstam, Rålanda Sweden Arranger 2010 Wallenstam, Vettåsen Sweden Arranger 2010 Jæren Energi Norway Co-arranger 2010 INPO 5 Latvia Arranger 2010 Arise Wind Power Sweden Arranger 2010 Tooma Tuulepark Estonia Co-arranger 2009 Vader Piet B.V. Aruba Lender 2009 Gudny Eysturoy, EPF Copenhagen Deal Manager Lars Nybom, EPF Stockholm Deal Manager Havøygavlen (Arctic Wind) Norway Co-arranger many more projects 18

19 Tusen takk! Nordea

Financing Wind Power Projects

Financing Wind Power Projects Banks risk assessments and some experiences EWEA wind policy framework workshop Riga, 15 June 2012 Hans Jacob Bull-Berg Director Nordea Export & Project Finance Wind Power