How to Obtain a Commercial Loan For Energy Cost

Transcription

1 Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia May 2007

2 Report title Project no. Date Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia Client Composed by Sign. François Sammut May 2007 Number of pages / annexes Approved by Sign. 12 pages Trond Dahlsveen Contents 1 Introduction Barriers to project financing Opportunities for project financing Case studies Lessons learnt...11 International Financial Institutions There are no good projects Owners of good projects It is impossible to get a loan Business Plan Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 2

3 1 Introduction This document presents an overview of the issues related to obtaining commercial loans for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects in Russia. The aim of the report is to summarise the main aspects of commercial loans and to describe the type of financing schemes that are acceptable. The document is to be used when assessing possible funding from commercial banks, both local and international, including International Financing Institutions, IFIs), for potential borrowers in Russia. Particular emphasis is placed on the following: What makes an acceptable borrower What type of security/guarantee is required How to prepare a loan application What is the potential for carbon financing Section 2 presents the main barriers to obtaining loans for Russian project developers. Section 3 describes the two main options for possible financing schemes. This section also presents case studies relating to carbon finance. Section 4 presents case studies detailing how the financing options work in practice. Section 5 serves as a conclusion to this report and presents a checklist to confirm that a potential borrower is committed to enter negotiations with banks. This document is primarily based on the experience of obtaining loans from the Nordic Environmental Funding Corporation (NEFCO), but much of the requirements presented here will also apply to obtaining loans from Russian commercial banks and other IFIs, such as EBRD or the World Bank. There are, however, differences between the different bank loans with respect to interest rates, loan amount and fees. 2 Barriers to project financing Conditions to qualify for a commercial loan can be strict, and the main issues which will need attention are: The legal status of the borrower The financial status of the borrower Equity from the borrower The security / guarantee for the loan The legal status of the borrower should be the first issue to be reviewed in order to determine if the borrower can actually take a loan from a commercial bank. This issue is particularly relevant for municipalities in Russia who want to obtain a loan from a foreign bank, specifically an IFI. Due to Russian legislation it is not currently possible for Russian municipalities to take loans in currencies other than roubles. In this case, it is important to ascertain if the targeted bank can provide loans in roubles, or, if this is not possible, to find out whether a borrower other than a municipality can be found. The financial status of the borrower is usually shown by providing the bank with copies of the audited financial reports for the previous 3 years. For loans from IFIs it is important that these have been audited according to IAS (International Accounting Standards) by a reputable auditing firm. If the borrower does not have accounts which are audited according to IAS (for example, audited to Russian standards by local firm) this may be acceptable if the guarantee is provided by a third party (guarantor) which has IAS audited accounts. The financial reports need to show that the company can service its existing debts in addition to being able to service the new loan from the bank. A final option, if neither the borrower or the guarantor has IAS audited accounts, is to hire an accounting firm to re-state the existing accounts for the last 3 years according to IAS, but the cost for this may be significant. In exceptional cases, IAS audited accounts may not be necessary if an Oblast or Federal level guarantee is possible. Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 3

4 The potential borrower should also ensure that they have sufficient equity to contribute a significant proportion of the investment. The proportion of the loan which should be covered by equity from the borrower will depend on the size of the investment required and the perceived risk of the project, but a minimum of 10% of the total investment should be covered by the borrower, and in most cases at least 30% of the total investment costs are to be covered by the borrower. By investing its own money into the project, the borrower is demonstrating that it is committed to ensuring that the project will be implemented effectively. The security / guarantee for the loan is also very important. This can take a number of forms, for example: Assets / resources (e.g. land, vehicles, product); Parent or sister company guarantee; Other third party guarantee (e.g. Oblast Administration); Bank guarantee. The guarantee has to be at least equal in value to the size of the loan, and will more probably need to exceed the size of the loan to account for depreciation or variations in currency exchange rates if the loan is not denominated in roubles. 3 Opportunities for project financing 3.1 Options available for commercial loans There are two main options for provision of loans to project developers in Russia. In the first option, the loan from the bank (local commercial bank, IFI) is provided directly to the project owner who has a sufficiently strong financial status and assets to secure the loan. This option can apply to private companies as well as municipalities. The financing scheme developed for this project is summarised below: Bank IAS audited accounts Loan Security Borrower Investment Project Option 1: Applies when the borrower can provide satisfactory security / guarantee and has the relevant audited financial accounts The form of security / guarantee can vary, and can include equity and/or assets. The latter can be in the form of property (buildings or land), equipment (for example by mortgaging existing equipment or equipment to be installed as part of the project) or other assets such as vehicles or ships. The second main option applies where the project owner is considered to be financially strong enough to service the loan, but does not have the assets required to secure the loan. It may also not Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 4

5 have relevant audited accounts to secure a sizeable loan. In this case, the guarantee is provided by a third party, such as a parent company or a sister company, who has both the required assets and relevant audited accounts. This option is also very relevant for smaller municipal borrowers, such as villages or districts, where the guarantee is provided by the Oblast or city budget. Bank Security Guarantor Loan e.g. Parent company, bank or Oblast Borrower Investment Project Option 2: Applies when the borrower cannot provide satisfactory security/guarantee and/or does not have the relevant audited financial accounts, and therefore needs a third party guarantee As mentioned, these are general descriptions of the two main options available, but variations within these two options are possible (e.g. different type of borrower or security). The next chapter presents case studies which demonstrate how these two schemes operate in practice. 3.2 The special case of municipalities Changes in the federal budget legislation during 2004 have made it difficult for international financing organisations such as IFIs to provide direct loans to Municipalities in Russia. The reason for this is that the legislation states that: Russian municipalities are not allowed to take foreign currency loans; Russian municipalities are not allowed to take loans directly from international financing institutions; Russian municipalities cannot provide guarantees in foreign currencies. The above issues therefore make it impossible for IFIs to provide a straightforward loan to a municipality in NW Russia, where the latter would be the borrower and would provide the guarantee in Euros for the loan. A different approach therefore has to be adopted, based on option 2 presented above. This approach involves providing the loan (in Euros) to a local company such as a Municipal Unitary Enterprise, for example the municipal energy company, or a local private company. The legislation does allow Municipal Unitary Enterprises (MUE) can take foreign currency loans directly from international financing institutions. This company would be the borrower and would invest in the project. The guarantee could be provided by the local municipality, but needs to be denominated in Russian Roubles. For this reason the guarantee in Roubles has to exceed the Euro value by, say, 50% in order to account for possible currency fluctuations. The security for the loan may also take other forms, such as pledging of assets, or a third party guarantee from a local company or bank. Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 5

6 3.3 Carbon financing In order to combat the threat of climate change, many countries, including Russia, have signed the Kyoto-protocol, which entered into force on 16 February The protocol outlines a set of mechanisms that can be used by countries to meet their commitments regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. One of those mechanisms, called Joint Implementation (JI), provides a procedure whereby developed countries can invest in emission reducing projects in other developed countries, where the cost of greenhouse gas reduction is lower. This provides a significant opportunity for municipalities and industries (the project owners) in Russia to use carbon finance (which means the use of carbon credits to help finance GHG reduction projects) in order to implement suitable energy efficiency and renewable energy projects. By implementing a JI project in Russia, the resulting emission reductions are converted into credits (called emission reduction units, or ERUs). These ERUs can be purchased by businesses in other developed countries and governments, such as Norway or Sweden, that are close to exceeding their emission quotas as determined by the Kyoto Protocol. In fact countries often don t buy these credits directly, but establish funds, such the Testing Ground Facility (TGF) managed by NEFCO or the Multilateral Carbon Credit Fund managed by the EBRD, which act as financiers for JI projects on their behalf. Experience shows that the additional revenue from selling carbon credits to carbon financiers covers between 10-40% of the projects investment costs. The process of developing JI projects begins with the preparation of a Project Idea Note (PIN), usually following a standard template which is completed by the project owner, and which describes the potential JI project, including an estimate of emission reductions. This PIN is then submitted to possible carbon financiers, and if the project meets with their approval, an option agreement (OA) may be signed. The OA provides a guarantee to carbon financiers that the project owner will only work with them. This allows the process to go on to the next stage, which is preparation of the Project Design Document (PDD). This is a detailed technical document which is submitted to the JI Supervisory Committee (JI-SC), and when approved by them, means that the project has been accepted as a JI project. Preparation and approval of the PDD can be a time consuming and expensive process, and often will be paid for by the carbon financier. In parallel with preparation of the PDD, the process of getting the project approved by the focal point in the host country where the project is being implemented, which in the case of Russia is the Ministry of Industry and Economic Development, can also begin. Once the project is implemented and starts to deliver the carbon credits, the carbon financier will start to pay the project developer. 4 Case studies It is important to note that each project will have its own optimum financing scheme, and many variations of the two options presented in chapter 3 are possible. The following section presents case studies demonstrating how the two options presented in chapter 3 can e implemented in practice. 4.1 Option 1 for borrowers who can provide their own security A reminder of what option 1 looks like: Bank IAS audited accounts Loan Security Borrower Investment Project Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 6

7 Renewable energy production in Kamenka, Arkhangelsk Oblast Kamenka village near Mezen in Arkhangelsk Oblast has a population of approximately people, and the main employer in the community has always been the local sawmill. Due to poor management in the 1990s the sawmill became unprofitable. This has had, in turn, a disastrous effect on the economy of Kamenka village. Northern Shipping Company bought the sawmill with a view to expanding production and bringing it back to profitable operation. The main issue with the viability of the sawmill is the supply of energy. The project objective is therefore to renovate the existing energy production equipment and install new equipment uses waste wood as fuel. The project also aims to install a new district-heating network for the settlement. The sawmill would then become the energy supplier for the village. For this project a financing scheme was designed whereby the loan from NEFCO is provided directly to the project owner who has a sufficiently strong financial status and assets to secure the loan. This scheme is considered to be applicable to situations where the borrower can provide security for the loan. In the case of Kamenka, the security under discussion is an asset in the form of a vessel belonging to the borrower, the Northern Shipping Company. It is also important that the borrower can provide the Financing Institution with annual accounts audited to according to International Auditing Standards (IAS audited accounts). A loan application for the Kamenka project was made to NEFCO for the sum of 2.4 mill. USD based on the above financing scheme, and the loan was approved by NEFCO. Renewable energy production, Zheshart Plywood Factory, Komi Republic Closed joint-stock company (CJSC) Zheshart Plywood Factory is located on the Vichegda River bank, near the settlement of Zheshart, which is situated 150 km to the north-west of Syktyvkar. The mill capacities allow production of over m 3 of wood-based panels per year. Up to the beginning of 2007, Closed joint-stock company (CJSC) Zheshart Plywood Factory had its own boiler-house producing heat to satisfy both the needs the factory and the whole settlement where it is located. The boiler-house comprised 6 boilers. Four of the boilers used natural gas as fuel, whilst the other two used wood waste (tree bark and waste from the production process). These two wood fired boilers could not, however, burn sawdust, as this requires a very specific boiler design. A significant amount of sawdust generated at the factory (approx tons/day), could not be used as fuel and was therefore being taken to a local solid waste disposal site. The project in question involved the installation of a new boiler in the existing boiler-house for combustion of sawdust, with a capacity of 7 megawatt (thermal), to replace the natural gas fired boilers. Existing boiler house at the Zheshart Plywood factory Due to its strong financial status, the Zheshart Plywood factory was able to secure a loan of from the NEFCO Cleaner Production facility. Zheshart Plywood factory also provided of its own equity. The loan was provided directly to the company, with existing machinery and equipment installed at the site serving as security for the loan. Installation of the new boiler was begun in November 2006 and the new boiler was put on line in February Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 7

8 4.2 Option 2 for borrowers who cannot provide direct security A reminder of what option 2 looks like: Bank Security Guarantor Loan e.g. Parent company, bank or Oblast Borrower Investment Project Cleaner production measures, Sawmill 25, Arkhangelsk Oblast Sawmill 25 in Arkhangelsk wanted to undertake renovations of much of its outdated production and utilities equipment. These renovations will reduce operational costs, improve environmental performance and increase social benefits. The two main developments proposed were the installation of a dry timber sorting line to replace the polluting and energy intensive wet sorting process and the construction of a new biofuel boiler facility. Energy intensive wet sorting line New dry sorting line A loan application for the Sawmill 25 project was made to NEFCO for the sum of 2.1 mill USD based on the financing scheme option 2. The loan was approved by NEFCO, and the loan agreement was signed May The financing scheme used is applicable to larger projects where the project owner is considered to be financially strong enough to service the loan, but does not have the assets itself required to secure the loan. It may also not have relevant audited accounts to secure a sizeable loan. In this case a third party such as the parent company or a large sister company with significant assets can provide the guarantee. In the case of Sawmill 25, the guarantee is provided by a large sister company, Arkhangelsk Pulp and Paper Mill. Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 8

9 Biofuel conversion, Pudozh, Republic of Karelia This financing scheme has been developed specifically for smaller sized projects where the borrower is the local administration or one of its energy companies. In this scheme the guarantee is provided by the local administration in the form of a specific line in the Administrations budget for the forthcoming years ( Payment Obligation ). This budget line is based on the annual savings in energy costs due to implementation of the new project. It is therefore important that the Regional Oblast or Republic agrees to retain the future energy tariff for the community at present (high) levels until the loan is paid back. A loan application for the Pudozh bioenergy project in Karelia was made to NEFCO for the sum of USD based on the above financing scheme. The proposed borrower would be a newly formed public energy company. The Administration of Pudozh would provide the guarantee for the loan in form of a specific line in the Administrations budget to cover the loan from NEFCO. This scheme is possible following discussions and negotiations with the Regional Energy Committee who have agreed to retain the energy tariff for this boiler house based on the use, and therefore high cost, of coal. Biofuel conversion, Podcherye, Republic of Komi Vuktyl District is situated in the East of the Komi Republic. Podcherye settlement is appoximately 25 km to the north east of the City of Vuktyl. The territory of the settlement was heated by three boilerhouses with a total of 13 coal-fired boilers installed in a period between 1972 and 1977 and now in a very poor condition, with an efficiency of only 35-40%. All the coal is delivered from Vorkuta by rail and river. The cost of the coal, in particular its delivery to Podcherye, is very high, which obviously has negative economic impacts on the financial situation of the District. The project proposed to install a modular boiler-house with three wood fired boilers having a total capacity of 3 MW. This new boiler house will replace the 3 existing coal fired boiler houses and the 13 boilers they contain. The installation of the biomass boiler will substitute the consumption of 3500 tons of coal per year. The annual net saving by installing the biomass boiler is calculated to be Euro. It is proposed that the project be financed by a combination of equity from the Administration of the City of Vuktyl and a Cleaner Production facility loan from NEFCO. Following earlier proposals and negotiations, it was concluded that the borrower which was originally proposed, the Administration of the City of Vuktyl, was not able to take a foreign currency loan according to Russian Federal legislation. A new borrower for the loan was therefore proposed, the Municipal Unitary Enterprise (MUE) Forest Economy of Podcherye. The Administration of the City of Vuktyl will provide a guarantee in the form of a specific line in the Administrations budget during the years when the loan is being repaid. The Administration of the City of Vuktyl has identified the renovation of the heat supply at Podcherye settlement as a high priority issue. As the Administration of the City of Vuktyl is the sole owner of MUE Forest Economy of Podcherye it will benefit directly from the profitable operation of its daughter company. Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 9

10 4.3 Carbon finance Renewable energy production, Zheshart Plywood Factory, Komi Republic The Zheshart biomass fuel switching project is a Joint Implementation project developed between the Russian Federation and the investor countries of the Baltic Sea Region Testing Ground Facility (Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Germany). The JI project was prepared by NEFCO on behalf of TGF (in its capacity as Fund Manager to the Facility).The project developer and owner is the privately owned CJSC Zheshart Plywood Factory, one of the largest plywood and particle board manufacturers in Russia. The project involves installation of a new 7 MW boiler within the existing boiler house of the CJSC Zheshart Plywood Factory that would use the sawdust produced at the factory as fuel, thereby displacing the use of natural gas. The total capital requirement of the project is met through the factory's own equity contribution (23%) and a NEFCO Cleaner Production Loan. The latter will be supported by carbon contribution from the TGF, which forms an integral part of the financing package linked indirectly to the NEFCO loan. Once approved, the project is expected to allow the buyer (TGF/ NEFCO) to purchase over ERUs over the five year Kyoto crediting period, which starts in 2008 and ends in This represents a potential revenue for the Zheshart Plywood Factory of over over the same five year period. Sawdust dump at Zheshart The project has two emission reduction components. The proposed small-scale project will replace the existing fossil fuel (natural gas) fired boiler with a biomass (sawdust) fired boiler (component I). The quantity of fossil fuel currently used by the existing boilers will be significantly reduced once the biomass fired boiler is installed. This will lead to a reduction of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases from the existing boiler house on the site. The fuel to be used by the new biomass boiler is sawdust originating from the activities undertaken at the site, which is currently treated as a waste product. Disposal of this sawdust at the local waste disposal site leads to significant emissions of methane resulting from anaerobic degradation of the sawdust. As a result of installation of the sawdust fired boiler the majority of the sawdust produced by the company will fuel the new boiler and will no longer require disposal (component II). This will lead to a reduction of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases from the existing waste disposal site. For a full explanation of the methodology used please refer to the Project Design Document ( project number 0037). tion District heating rehabilitation, Murmansk, Murmansk Oblast The Leninsky district of Murmansk City serviced by Severnaya and Rosta centralised district heating systems accounts for about one third of the City population, with a heat of approximately Gcal/year (812 GWh per year). The existing district heating systems in the Leninsky district are to a large degree of the open type i.e. all domestic hot water is produced in the central plant and distributed to the consumers through the district heating piping network. This results in water quality problems and relatively high energy consumption. The Priority Investment Program (PIP) that is proposed for the Leninsky district consists of installation of heat exchanger stations with modern control equipment in all served buildings. Replacement of some parts of the distribution piping network and installation of control equipment, new pumps with variable speed control and new burners on two boilers in the Severnaya boiler plant is also proposed. The PIP will require an investment of approximately 30 Million EUR. Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 10

11 The investment program will result in reduced energy consumption for the end user by 15% and the fuel consumption in heating plants will be reduced by over 20%. This will correspond to a reduction in CO 2 emissions of approximately tonnes over the 5 year Kyoto period. The Murmansk District Heating Rehabilitation project has been prepared as a JI project developed between the Russian Federation and the investor countries of the Baltic Sea Region Testing Ground Facility. The JI project was prepared by NEFCO on behalf of TGF. The project developer and owner is TEKOS, who currently operate the boiler houses and manage the district heating network in Murmansk. The project is financed through a contribution from TEKOS, grants from the Northern Dimension Environment Programme (NDEP) and the Swedish Bilateral Aid Agency (SIDA), with the majority of the investments coming from a loan from the Nordic Investment Bank (NIB). Like many large scale infrastructure projects, the return on investment is low, and is unlikely to be of interest to local Russian banks who are very focused on short payback periods. This emphasises the need for carbon financing and the project IRR improves significantly with the additional revenue from the sale of carbon credits. Scenario IRR Payback period Without sale of carbon credits 2.89 % 10 years With sale of carbon credits 4.85 % 9 years Note: sale of carbon credits over the Kyoto period only The table above shows that the sale of carbon credits results in a more acceptable return on the investment due to the generation of additional income. The return on investment improves further, to an IRR of 6.19 %, if the sale of carbon credits is considered to be possible after For a full explanation of the methodology used please refer to the Project Design Document ( project number 0027). 5 Lessons learnt 5.1 Bank loans It is important to make sure that the potential borrower understands what loans banks can offer, what the interest rate and pay-back periods are and what are the conditions for obtaining the loan. In order to make sure that the borrower will not be wasting their time by submitting a project proposal, the following 10 golden rules should be followed: 1. Make sure the borrower is acceptable: do they have open and clear accounts which can be shown to the bank and don t have too much debt already; 2. Can the borrower provide security/guarantee for the loan themselves: this can be assets (e.g. land, buildings, ships ) or money placed in a separate account; 3. If the borrower cannot provide the security/guarantee themselves, can they get a guarantee from a third party: the guarantor could be a parent or sister company, a bank, the local administration, the Oblast or Republic or the Russian Federation; 4. Is the proposed guarantor acceptable: if the guarantor is a private company or a bank they will need to be financially strong enough to guarantee the loan, they can t have excessive debts and they should have open and clear accounts which can be shown to the bank; 5. If the guarantee comes from the local administration or Oblast/Republic, are they committed: is the local administration or Oblast/Republic prepared to include a line in their budget to guarantee the loan and, if applicable, can they ensure that any savings from the project can be used to pay back the loan; 6. Is the timescale for obtaining the loan from bank acceptable to the borrower: in particular when applying for a loan from an IFI, from submission of the preliminary project proposal to first disbursement, the process for a small to medium sized loan takes a minimum Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 11

12 of 4-6 months, whereas at least 12 months are needed for the larger loans loans from local banks might be quicker to obtain; 7. Are the environmental benefits significant: banks usually assesses the environmental impacts as amount of CO 2 saved, but other positive environmental impacts, such as a reduction in water pollution or better management of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) may also be important, especially if amount of CO 2 saved is low; 8. Is the borrower aware of the resources and costs associated with getting a loan: In addition to the interest rate, other costs will arise such as front-end fees, commitment charges, lawyer costs and possibly consultancy costs for local or international experts. 9. Is the borrower prepared to adhere to international requirements and standards: if the borrower is obtaining a loan from an IFI they should be aware that they will have to satisfy certain basic requirements related to the suppliers they can use, the procurement process they can adopt and the timescale required for bidding. For example, the EBRDs guidelines on prequalification of contractors ( demonstrates the requirements of a typical IFI. 10. Is the borrower aware of the of the banks requirements for project monitoring: This is again most relevant to IFIs there is a need for the bank to closely monitor the progress of the project during its construction and implementation, and the borrower will need to ensure that this monitoring is carried out. 5.2 Carbon finance In addition to the above, certain criteria also apply when determining if a project can qualify for carbon financing. As a minimum, projects should only be considered possible candidates for carbon financing only if they meet the following rules: 1. Will the project deliver large enough volumes of emission reductions: because of the costs involved in developing a JI project, projects should deliver a minimum amount of emission reductions in order to be cost-effective. In most cases it will be difficult to find project developers if the project does not reduce CO 2 emissions by at least 40,000 to 50,000 tonnes per year. In exceptional cases, project developers might be found to invest in smaller projects, down to maybe 15,000 tonnes of CO 2 reduced per year, but only if the developer has other stakes in the project (as in the case of Zheshart above), or if the project results in significant social benefits. 2. Does the project meet the criteria for additionality: the concept of additionality is specific to carbon financing, and can be a difficult concept to understand. Basically, the emission reductions must be additional to what would be attained if the project did not receive carbon financing. The project owner must show that there are barriers to implementation of the project (financial, economic or technical) which means that without the revenue from the sale of emission reductions, the project would not be implemented in the manner which would lead to those emission factors. 3. The baseline cannot be the project to be implemented: another concept specific to carbon financing, the baseline is the scenario which would be implemented in the future without carbon finance being available. This might be business as usual, or another option, but should not be the project proposed for carbon financing. The baseline should also be the scenario which results in high CO 2 emissions. 4. Time schedule: the Kyoto period when carbon financing can be provided for projects runs from 2008 to What will happen after 2012 has not been determined. Good candidates for carbon financing should therefore be implemented and start delivering emission reductions as soon as possible, in order to benefit most from the additional revenues. If a project will only be completed in 2010 or 2011, and will only get revenues for emission reduction to the end of 2012, then it may not be cost effective to develop it as a JI project. Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects in Russia 12