1 / 21

Financing innovative environmentally sustainable solutions

Financing innovative environmentally sustainable solutions. Karl-Johan Lehtinen Seminar iBSG Brussels , June 15th, 2011. The countrywise reduction targets of the BSAP. NEFCO in brief. Geographic mandate. I nternational financial institution established by the Nordic countries

tessa
Download Presentation

Financing innovative environmentally sustainable solutions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Financinginnovativeenvironmentallysustainablesolutions Karl-Johan LehtinenSeminariBSGBrussels, June 15th, 2011 Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  2. The countrywise reduction targets of the BSAP Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  3. NEFCO in brief Geographic mandate • Internationalfinancial institution established by the Nordic countries • Loans and equityinvestmentsfor environmentalprojects in Eastern Europe • Funds to a total value of EUR 460 million • Headquartered in Helsinkiwith 27 employees • Locallycontractedconsultants in Russia and Ukraine Helsinki Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  4. Ourjourneysofar 2010– Over 400 projectsfinanced 1990 – NEFCO is established, firstsixprojectsfinanced in 1991 2008–2009 NEFCO CarbonFund, Nordic ClimateFacility and BSAP Fund 1996 – NEFCO'scapitalis doubled from €40 to 80 million 1995 – The Nordic EnvironmentalDevelopmentFund 2000–122 projectsfinanced in Eastern Europe 1990 2010 Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  5. The Baltics ~160 projects Main sectors: water, cleanerproduction, energy, agriculture Russia ~150 projects Main sectors: energy, water, cleanerproduction Ukraine ~85 projects Main sectors: energy, cleanerproduction, agriculture Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  6. NEFCO's instruments • NEFCO INVESTMENT FUND (RU, UKR, BR) • Equity investments • Loan on market terms, subordinated loans, mezzanine financing • NORDIC ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT FUND (RU, UKR, BR) • Soft Loans, Contingency financing • Cleaner Production Lending Facility • Energy Savings Recycled Grants Programme • Agricultural Environmental Lending Programme • Social Energy Savings Loan Facility • OTHER FUNDS • NEFCO Carbon Fund • TGF Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  7. NEFCO'sfundingresources Mikael Sjövall, Petrozavodsk, 31 May 2011

  8. NEFCO's emission reductions 09/10 Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  9. Results of ourwork in 2010: CO2: 3 milliontonnes P: 1,251 tonnes SOx: 8,075 tonnes = 6.2 millionpeopleflyingfrom Helsinki to New York = untreatedwastewaterfrom 1.7 millionpeople = 1/10 of the total SO2-emissions in Finland in 2007 Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  10. External funds • Nordic Investment Bank (NIB), 500 MEUR • The BSAP fund for TechnicalAssistance, financed by Sweden and Finland 110 MSEK aimed at supportingfeasibility studies and capacityimprovement to findbankableprojects • The TA-fund is managed by NIB/NEFCO and is available for countriesoutside NEFCO interest as well as for otherfinancing institutions Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  11. Traditional NEFCO engagements • Municipal wastewatertreatment • Industrial emissions, bothwastewater and otherwastegenerated in the foodindustry and at large animal farms • Solid waste (i.e. Sillamäe, Estonia) Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  12. Reality check • Financiersconcentrate on specificprojects, not programs • The sadreality: good programmes do not necessarilylead to projectfinancingwithoutidentification of real projects • After identification of bankableprojectsthey are included in the projectcycle of the financier Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  13. Future challenges/possibilities Challenges: • Remaining problems in the wastewater sector • Large animal farms • Traditional agriculture Possibilities: • Integration of agriculture-waste-energy sectors into win-win solutions Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  14. The need for applying new technologies • Conventionaltechnologies not enough to solveremainingenvironmentalissues • Demo projectsneeded • First step to conquer export markets • High value of demo projectsbeyondhome turf proving not onlytechaspectbutalsoadaptability, business models, financeability etc. Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  15. Cost-efficiency of new solutions • The real challenge is to find the balance of environmentalbenefit and pay-back time. Example: • to replace 1 tonne CO2 using LED lightning at a cost of 10 EUR as compared with 130 EUR/tonne for improvedinsulation or 500 EUR for solar PVCs. • The logicwould be to buylamps for 500 EUR and reduce 50 tons Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  16. Potential win-win solutions • Base-line: no use of food stuff for energyproduction. • Instead: use of waste from agriculture to enhanceclosed loops of nutrients and production of renewableenergy • Examples: biogas production from manure and otheragriwaste: recycling of nutrients and production of energy. Not applicableeverywhere Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  17. Potential win-wincont. • Chicken manure for production of energy, biodiesel and biochar • Studyon-goingwithin the BSAP fund • Focus at existingpoultry farms at the Karelianishtmus in Russia Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  18. Products obtained from pyrolysis of chicken manure Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  19. Non-commercialfish • A catch of 10 000 tonnes/yearwouldmean 50 tonnesphosphorus removal at a cost of 4 MEUR • Correspondingcost for 1 t P removal from rural households is 4.3 MEUR • E.g. fisheryabout 50 timesmorecosteffective Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  20. Legislation • May hamperuse of mostcost-efficient solutions sincedirectivescall for uniform application • Thus, Swedish or Finnish moneycouldreach far morebenefitsifinvested in Poland or Russia thanifinvested in SE or FIN • Establishment of a nutrient credit system couldalso be hampered by legislation • One way to enhancenutrientsalescould be the binding of dissolved P in Baltic deep water areas by aeration Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

  21. Thankyou for yourtime! Karl-Johan Lehtinen│karl-johan.lehtinen@nefco.fi │ +358 40 539 1239 www.nefco.org Karl-Johan Lehtinen, Brussels, 15 June 2011

More Related