Geothermal Hot Water Supply of Saburtalo District in Tbilisi, Georgia

Transcription

1 Geothermal Hot Water Supply of Saburtalo District in Tbilisi, Georgia 1. Project brief The project proposal Geothermal hot water supply of Saburtalo district in Tbilisi, Georgia has been developed in order to improve the energy efficiency of hot water supply of Saburtalo district population and increase the utilization of local renewable heat source (geothermal) to reduce the GHGs emissions. The proposal aims at supply of residents ( flats, the part of Tbilisi Saburtalo district called Saburtalo pilot district) with high parameters hot water therefore improving the living conditions of this population, increasing the energy security by replacing the imported natural gas and electricity currently used for preparation of hot water with indigenous environmentally sound renewable heat. Only 20% of residents (and few public buildings) are being currently supplied directly by self-flowing geothermal water with low parameters which is one of the reasons for non-payment by consumers. The transfer of new technology (not yet used in Georgia) such as Geothermal Circulation System (GCS) is planned at the heat generation stage. Fresh (tap) water will be heated by geothermal heat using the heat exchangers and the low temperature utilized water will be re-injected back to the wells supporting the water debit of wells. Complete replacement of existing obsolete pipelines with efficient pre-insulated pipelines is planned at the distribution side. Installation of hot water meters for each flat to improve the accountability system and payment collection rate is also considered as energy efficiency measure. In past time the tariff for heat was fixed per person and per sq. meter. Establishment of condominium for each building or block also is envisaged in order to improve the payment system. The relatively small scale and pilot nature of the project could be considered as a limitation. However the project should be assessed for both environmental and financial benefit. It is clear that the transaction costs beard by the project is significant comparing with the project revenue but in order to protect the environment and contribute in global problem the GEF already provided financial assistance for feasibility study and special technical assistance (grant) for fund establishment, training of private bank staff for such special type of investments or additional investigation of project barriers and preparation of feasible business plan. Though still we have problems with the project management and equity capital. 2. Technical description of project Rehabilitation of existing productive geothermal wells, construction of GCS (Geothermal Circulation System), rehabilitation of existing hot water distribution network, installation of GeoTS (Geothermal Thermal Station) and installation of hot water meters are milestones planned in project. GCS is innovative for Georgia though it is already broadly used in other neighboring countries (Russia, Turkey, etc). Existing in Georgia practice of geothermal heat utilization is wasteful and all geothermal wells are operating by self-flow of geothermal water resource. Reconnaissance studies carried out by local and international experts concluded that the surface charge of wells is insignificant and not enough to maintain the water debit in wells. Therefore construction of GCS will improve the parameters of pumped from productive wells (2 productive wells) geothermal water and re-injection of utilized low temperature geothermal water into the non-productive wells (2 non productive wells for re-injection) maintain the initial water debit of wells MW capacity will be installed in GeoTS with the efficiency of system estimated as 96%. The principal scheme for the construction of GCS using the existing 4 wells is presented on the Fig.1. Productive wells in this system are: N5 and N7. Their technical condition is rather better than other wells and correspondingly they need not the significant rehabilitation works. The wells N1 and N9 should be used for re-injection. At present these wells are conserved and thus, the national experts cannot exactly determine the necessary works in advance. Construction of existing productive wells allows to hang 150 m 3 /h capacity electric pumps in each of them. However taking into consideration the anticipated heat demand for hot water supply 150 m 3 /h and 50 m 3 /h

2 electric pumps will be used. Thermal water pumped up at the earth surface passes through the degasator, installed directly near the wells, where the geothermal water is discharged from the accompanying gases. After degasation thermal water pumped from No.5 and No.7 wells runs by self-flow to the water collector in Geothermal Station (GeoTS). Installed capacity of GeoTS is 10.6 MW. 200m 3 /h geothermal water with temperature 65 0 C will pass through heat exchangers heating tap water of 10 0 C up to 55 0 C and utilized geothermal water with temperature 20 0 C will be re-injected back in the wells N1 and N9. Heated tap water from the heat exchanger is delivered to the two accumulator reservoirs located on +700m and +580m marks from where it is distributed among the consumers. Use of hot water meters is not also traditional and typical for Georgia. Per person fixed tariff calculated on the assumption that the consumption is 100 l (55 0 C) hot water per person have been used in Soviet time. Improved management scheme and establishment of building condominium is also innovative approach for this sector. Commercial control - the ability and will to suspend services to non payers will be a critical factor in this scheme. Installation of heat meters for improvement of accountability and payment is envisaged by the project. GEF granted money to the population of the pilot district for installation of meters. The project owner is private sector which is interested in commercial control and income. The requirement from GEF and KfW is to promote the private sector giving them opportunity to get concessional loans from Revolving Fund managed by private bank. In case of successful implementation of the project replication of the GCS for other wells is envisaged. 3. Investment cost of the project (Project Costs: how have the costs been calculated / estimated and by whom? What are the underlying assumptions? Is there already a detailed technical specification / bill of quantities for the equipment supply and construction cost? Who is responsible for these numbers? (borrower / engineer / contractor?) and who takes the hit if they are wrong? What procurement methods are envisaged? How and when are the costs to be paid and to whom? What are the main contractual obligations and safeguards in this connection? The answers to these questions will help quantify the risk of cost overrun, which the document already identifies as a significant risk). The costs of the project have been calculated by Ltd Geothermia together with the experts from the Climate Change Agency of the Ministry of Environment during the preparation of feasibility study financed by UNDP/GEF. Later on these results have been reviewed by international experts from Ramboll. Responsible for these numbers is Geothermia. All detailed tables for construction costs or detailed technical specification could be provided (they are in full project documents) to the investor. These figures should be reassessed within the business plan and tender documentations which should be submitted to the private bank (responsible for the management of Revolving Fund). In the technical assistance component for establishment of Revolving Fund there are terms related to the preparation of project final documentation. Along with the international consultancy envisaged by technical component participation of private bank representatives is also considered. Procurement method is not negotiated yet but based on the current practice the private bank should be responsible for all procurements when Fund resources are used though the application should be done by Geothermia. Table 1. Initial Investments Investment components Investment costs (USD) Energy generation component Geothermal Circulation System (GCS)

3 Geothermal Thermal Station Distribution Network Internal works in the building % Contingency Total Table 2. Annual maintenance costs Component Annual maintenance costs (USD) Annual electricity costs Annual fresh water costs Annual maintenance costs Annual labor costs Other annual costs Total annual costs Economical parameters of the project Different scenarios have been considered during the assessment of economical parameters of project: without any grant support, with grant for installation of heat meters, 80% payment, step by step increase of consumption starting from 50 litres per person and reaching 100 l consumption per person. However the risk here is the default / non payment of individual households which is much harder to evaluate. The first step for risk elimination was to divide the initial proposal into phases. The initial proposal has been designed for heat and hot water supply of the pilot district (9 mln. capital costs) but taking into consideration the advice given by international experts with regard the payment for heat and technical problems (current design of old heating systems doesn t avail to cut the individual flats and renovation of these systems is very expensive) related with the cutting of the individual households (flats) it has been decided to test the payment problem for the case of hot water supply only. The second step taken is the assumption for project income component that payment would be 80% though it might be less and for different assumptions different IRR sheets could be prepared and considered with investors. The third step considered is establishment of building condominiums responsible for fee collection. As a future action it s possible to bind the geothermal hot water consumers account to the already implemented by electricity distribution company the computerized system of accountability of electricity consumers (some Utilities like drinking water suppliers or municipal waste service have already used this opportunity for improvement of their income). (Project Revenues: who are the customers of the project? Is it possible to quantify their financial standing? Are there lots of small customers or a few big ones? Individuals or companies? What is the expected

4 breakdown of the monthly / yearly revenue stream by customer? What is the payment history of the customers based on experience of similar projects? What happens if one larger customer or a number of smaller customers default on payment or go out of business? In summary: a simple summing of the total expected revenues will not suffice (although it is the starting point) - the document needs to examine the source and reliability of these revenues if possible or at least the borrower must be prepared to field the question in the ensuing dialogue. The extent of required detail will rise with the level of perceived risk and the tendency towards a full non-recourse financing model.) Customers of the project are households. Their affordability is not very high but it is becoming better. There are 27,825 residents or 12,278 flats. Yearly revenue could be presented together with the IRR excel sheet calculated for 80% payment. We have not in Georgia exactly the similar project with Geothermal Circulation System and high parameters of supplied hot water but current payment is about 50% (reason is that water parameters such as: temperature, pressure, smell, aggressiveness don t satisfy the consumers). (Annex II) (Project Economics: bankers (being bankers) will also like to see that the base case project economics can withstand various down-side and worst case scenarios (however unlikely these may seem at the outset). Whilst it is the banker's job to devise these scenarios and perform the serious stress testing of the business case cash flows (often together with the borrower) it always makes a good psychological impact if the borrower has performed this exercise as well - at least in part. If he is an experienced operator then he will have a far better feel for the real risk scenarios of the business than the bankers.) This risk assessment would be conducted by the borrower together with the Fund management bank representatives or international experts who are invited for the preparation of tender documents. (Benchmarking: it would be useful to draw comparisons with other similar projects (to the extent that such information is available) in terms of, total investment cost, the unit cost of delivered irrigated water, expected payback periods, charges, return on capital, project IRR etc.) Unfortunately we have not yet the similar system in Georgia and we have not done such investigation for neighboring countries (Russia, Turkey). 4. Project financing scheme According to the agreement between GEF-KfW and Georgian Government the revolving fund will be established aimed at increase the utilization of local renewable energy sources and to assist the local private sector acting in this field. Reliable private bank have to be selected jointly by KfW-Georgian Government- UNDP for management of the Fund. 1,05 mln USD, for construction of GCS and GeoTS, is pledged as a concessional credit with grace period (tentatively 3 years), low interest rate (less than 5% annually) and long-term payback period (15 years). 0,45 mln USD is granted by the GEF to the population of the pilot district and is allocated for installation of hot water meters. Owner of 20 years License on geothermal resource-ltd Geothermia takes responsibility to perform the work for construction two water reservoirs with total investment 0,36 mln USD and part of internal works (in total 0.5 mln). According to the preliminary negotiations the rest 1,00 mln USD for renovation of existing old and obsolete hot water pipelines with efficient pre-insulated pipes and part of internal works was under the responsibility of Municipality of Tbilisi. After the election of new city government the priorities have been changed and at present the source of this investment is still unsolved. Component Amount (USD) mln Type of financing Name of financier Status Installation of hot water meters (consumption) 0,45 Grant GEF Received (by country)

5 Construction of GSC and GeoTS (generation) Renovation of hot water pipeline network (distribution) and reservoirs Internal works and contingency (10%) 1,05 Credit Georgian Revolving Fund for Renewables (1,28) Credit Not decided Fund Municipality of Tbilisi 0.65 Not decided Municipality of Tbilisi Received (by Government) Received Not confirmed Not confirmed Construction of 0,50 In-kind Ltd. Geothermia Commited reservoirs (distribution) Total 3,93 Who is the owner of the Project? And who is going to be the borrower? The Ltd Geothermia is owner of project in sense of borrowing the money, implementation of project, management and monitoring though the project has been prepared by GEF money granted to the Government of Georgia and Revolving Fund envisaged as public (governmental) but managed by private bank. Ministry of environment is vitally interested in project realization and leaves the right to hold the project and licence currently belonged to Geothermia to other representative of private sector (it might be a joint venture with foreign partners having experience in such field) with better management, better balance sheets and may be less technical experience. Current financial status of Ltd Geothermia desires to be better. (Does the project owner / borrower aim to finance the project "on or off balance sheet"? Is this going to be a project where the finance providers have recourse only to the project assets and revenues without any recourse to or support from other assets or revenue streams of the borrower (Limited or Non Recourse Finance)? Or is the borrower prepared and able to provide support in need from its other assets, operations and revenue sources. To what extent can this support be documented in the form of authority, ministry, government, bank or other third party guarantees? What other involved parties (contractors / suppliers / operators etc) might be prepared to share in aspects of the various risks? This can also be decided in negotiation with the bankers but the borrower needs a clear idea of his own possibilities, limitations, aims and strategies in this respect. ) Geothermia claimed to make in-kind contribution about 0.5 mln USD for construction of hot water reservoirs. Revolving Fund doesn t imply to ask for any assets but very feasible business plan. GEF insists on equity from the local partners (Municipality or private sector). KfW money is also considered as risk sharing but 20-25% participation of national capital is requested. In future in case of success of the Fund it could be used by government as equity share in other projects. Current borrower s (Geothermia) assets are very poor including their balance sheets. The key in this scheme could be a private sector operator working with the municipality in a PPP structure if legislation permits. PP have intensively considered the PPP structure furthermore that the boiler house and distribution networks are still the property of Tbilisi Municipality and at the project development stage the authorities of Municipality have pledged allocation of 1mln USD for this project. After the changes in the city government the priorities have been changed and at the time being this partnership is under threaten. The subject is not completely closed and it still could be positively solved. In general rehabilitation of heat and hot water supply systems (fully cut in 1990 because of lack of imported fossil fuel) are not priority for the city government. The government s policy deems to increase the natural gas supply (Georgia is still in cheap natural gas region though it is clear that

6 price could go up any time) to the population and replacement of existing gas distribution network (which is only for cooking) with higher pressure network suitable for individual/building heating systems. 6. Price (market) analysis Based on economic and financial parameters of pilot project the price analysis has been conducted due to investigation of attractiveness of geothermal hot water supply and consumers affordability. Expenses for preparation of hot water while using the different energy carriers are submitted in the table 3 below. Table 3. Expenses for hot water Source of energy Unit Efficiency for end-user (%) Prices on energy carriers (USD) Monthly expenses (100 litre) per person (USD) Costs for heating 1 m 3 water (USD) Geothermal m * 3.00** 1.00** Natural gas m Electricity kwh Kerosene litre LPG kg Fuel wood m *For geothermal heat supply all expenses (except of taxes) are included in calculations ** Assumption of possible tariffs. According to this table the tariff for geothermal hot water should be no more than 1USD. It could be ensured by low maintenance costs and initial subsidies (grants) covering the incremental costs of geothermal circulation system. Two options are considered for estimation of economical parameters: minimum estimated tariff for geothermal hot water USD and maximum tariff 1.00 USD. IRRs of project for twenty (20) years life time of system are 5% and 11% accordingly considering the GEF grants for installation of hot water meters 450,000 USD. Consumption of hot water is started from 30 litres per person /per day and approached the former soviet norm (which is still valid in Georgia and is not reassessed) 100 litre hot water per person /per day after 15 years of system operation. The trend of possible increase of hot water consumption should be reassessed according to the going up affordability of consumers from pilot district. (Annex II). Average annual reduction of CO 2 is calculated about 12,000 t.

7 Annex I

8 Annex II-A Project economic parameters (without any grants and concessions) Year Daily consumption of DHW [liters/pp] Total annual DHW consumption [m3] Annual hours of operation Annual electricity costs [USD] Annual fresh water costs [USD] Total annual revenues [USD] Total annual costs [USD] Net annual revenues [USD] IRR= 5% Annex II-B Project economic parameters (500,000 GEF grant for hot water meters) Year Daily consumption of DHW [liters/pp] Total annual DHW consumption [m3] Annual hours of operation Annual electricity costs [USD] Annual fresh water costs [USD] Total annual revenues [USD] Total annual costs [USD] Net annual revenues [USD]

9 IRR= 11%