ew 10
DESCRIPTION
ÂTRANSCRIPT
ener
gyw
orld
No
10 -
Nov
embe
r - D
ecem
ber 2
015
www.energyworldmag.com
The Magazine for Information & Analysis on Energy Policies
PARIS SUMMIT “DOMINATED” by RENEWAbLES
November - December 2015Price: 10 Euros
Global temperatures risinG despite national pledGesThe new deposiT renders egypT an energy superpowerprinCiples oF a FleXible petroleum FisCal FrameWorK
The greek gas markeT under The Third moubulGaria avoids international arbitrationrenewables and sTaTe aid: beyond good inTenTions...
Code: 210062
Founder Apostolos Komnos
Publisher Anastasia Komnou
Publishing Assistant Dragos Zaharia
Deputy Editor Emilia Damian
Edition Advisor George Pavlopoulos
Editors Emilia Damian Ada Gavrilescu Penelope Mitroulia Nikolay Jekov Stevan Veljovic Vladimir Spasic Kostas Voutsadakis George Pavlopoulos Ian Becker Yiannis PispirigosDesign A.L.L. Designers www.alldesigners.eu
Art Director Anastasia Komnou Email: [email protected]
Commercial Director Apostolos Komnos Email: [email protected]
Administration Chrysa Drakopoulou E: [email protected]
Subscriptions Romania: +40 21 3110455 Greece: +30 210 7240510 Bulgaria: +359 24 175279
energyworld Magazine is published bi-monthly by All Media Designers S.R.L. Sos. Nicolae Titulescu nr.3, Bloc A1, ap.62, Sector 1, CP 011131, Bucuresti
www.energyworldmag.com
Energyworld magazine. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be transmitted or reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
The Best Source for Energy News
The english edition for SE Europe & Eastern MediterraneanIssue Nr 10November - December 2015
ISSUE PRICE 10 Euros
ROMANIA BucharestAll Media Designers S.R.L. Dragos ZahariaMobile: +40 766 667 733Email: [email protected]
BULGARIA SofiaALEANA Commercial & Media Services Ltd Julia Paleva Mobile: +359 89 7617777 Email: [email protected]
GREECE AthensTRIM S.A. Sofia Andritsopoulou Mobile: +30 6932 40 40 40E: [email protected]
ENERGYWORLD PUBLISHING NETWORK
Partners
Your Energy Magazine for Southeastern Europe
EnergyWorld
@EnergyWorldmag
www.energyworldmag.com
2
ContentsED
ITOR
IAL
NEW
S IN
BRI
EF
EU S
EEkS
“D
EAL
FOR
A cE
NTU
Ry”
IN P
ARIS
SU
mm
IT
“yEL
LOW
... c
ARD”
FO
R G
REEN
EN
ERG
y IN
EU
ROPE
?
GLO
BAL
TEm
PERA
TURE
S RI
SIN
G D
ESPI
TE N
ATIO
NAL
PLE
DG
ES
ROm
ANIA
IN T
hE
FIRS
T PL
AcES
OF
EURO
PE’S
“G
REEN
LEA
GU
E”
SERB
IA W
ILL
hAR
DLy
mEE
T Th
E TA
RGET
S O
F 20
20
ThE
cOST
OF
REN
EWAB
LE E
NER
Gy
SOU
RcES
IN S
ERBI
A
ThE
NEW
DEP
OSI
T RE
ND
ERS
EGyP
T AN
EN
ERG
y SU
PERP
OW
ER
ROm
ANIA
SAy
S “N
O” T
O RU
SSIA
AN
D “y
ES”
TO T
hE
WES
T
PRIN
cIPL
ES O
F A
FLEX
IBLE
PET
ROLE
Um
FIS
cAL
FRAm
EWO
Rk
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11
3
ThE
“RID
DLE
” O
F m
AIN
TAIN
ING
A P
UBL
Ic P
Pc
mO
L –
20 S
Ucc
ESSF
UL
yEAR
S IN
RO
mAN
IA...
AN
D cO
UN
TIN
G
ROm
ANIA
N “
INvA
SIO
N”
IN T
hE
ENER
Gy
SEcT
OR
OF
mO
LDO
vA
hAR
D TI
mES
FO
R O
mv
PETR
Om
DU
E TO
LO
W O
IL P
RIcE
S
ARE
WE
READ
y TO
LAU
Nch
Th
E BL
Ack
SEA
DEv
ELO
PmEN
T?
NAT
URA
L G
AS c
AR F
OR
IND
IvID
UAL
S AN
D BU
SIN
ESSE
S
ThE
GRE
Ek G
AS m
ARkE
T U
ND
ER T
hE
ThIR
D m
oU
BULG
ARIA
AvO
IDS
INTE
RNAT
ION
AL A
RBIT
RATI
ON
REN
EWAB
LES
AND
STAT
E AI
D: B
EyO
ND
GO
OD
INTE
NTI
ON
S...
ENER
Gy
DIR
EcTO
Ry12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
4
01Seeking a green revolution in PariS…
editorialBy the publisher
2 degrees. This is the magic number in the world of scientists, politicians and activists concerning the climate change, as we head towards the Paris Climate Summit of December. According to all of them, the rise in the mean temperatures on Earth must not exceed this level – or else, they warn humanity shall face irreversible consequences, affecting our lives and those of the next generations in all sectors: economy and agriculture, wild forests and sea level, water and sanitation health and diseases.
Until now, there is not much to make us feel more optimistic about the future. Former similar summits have produced little concrete and binding decisions, which could lead to the necessary
reductions in the emissions of the so-called greenhouse gases and especially carbon dioxide. And at the same time, we have become witnesses of a global blame game, mainly between developed (EU, Japan, Canada) and emerging economies (China, India, Russia etc), regarding the responsibilities for the crime committed against our planet.
Of course, many countries have made significant progress in the last decades, especially in Western Europe, which has emerged as the “green champion” of the world. And the truth is that the US president, Barack Obama, has pledged to take large steps to deal with the greenhouse effect, pushing binding legislation through (controlled
by the Republicans…) Congress until his second and last term in the White House ends, after the presidential elections in December 2016.
But, as UN, OECD and many analysts recently pointed out, it might be “too little, too late” for Earth. Especially as the persisting and global economic slowdown leads to a painful “haircut” in the capital headed towards “green investments” and public subsidies for the sector. So, unless the Paris Climate Summit is sealed with an unprecedented “green revolution”, we shall see no more than one more declaration that is going to be put deep in the draws of the governments’ desks…
6
News in brief
02Another Russian-German deal
Iran’s ambitious energy plans
The purchase of E.ON’s Norwegian oil and gas assets to Russian billionaire Mikhail Fridman (pictured), announced on October 14, is the most recent proof of the excellent ties between Germany and Russia, especially in the energy sector – and despite the bilateral sanctions due to the war in Ukraine. Besides, earlier this year, Moscow and Berlin have signed an agreement for the construction of Nord Stream II, Gazprom and Basf have celebrated their 25 years of successful and fruitful cooperation and Fridman’s LetterOne energy fund (headed by former BP boss John Browne) has bought DEA Deutsche Erdoel from RWE, which is E.ON’s German peer. Three deals in what proves to be a new golden era of cooperation between the Russian tycoon with Germany...One should remember that Fridman was forced to sell his British North Sea assets as a result of Western sanctions over the Ukraine crisis. But the Germans came to cover his loss, by selling to him their oil and gas exploration and production activities in the North Sea. “The successful sale of our E&P business in Norway is a landmark transition in the sector”, Michael Sen, E.ON’s chief financial officer, said in a statement, while Norway’s oil minister welcomed the fact that international companies are interested in investing in his country, in an era of low oil prices which tend to kill all major investment in the sector.Of course, the deal – which came as a result of E.ON’s restructuring plan – is subject to the regulatory approval of both the Norwegian authorities and the European Commission. If it gets the green light, it is expected to close by the end of the year and Fridman will own 16,35 more barrels of oil equivalents (the output of the company’s Norwegian E&P business in 2014) and E.ON’s 43 licenses. Not bad at all, don’t you agree?
After Western sanctions are lifted, something that may occur during 2016, Iran – which has some of the world’s largest gas reserves– is planning to restart its exports to its potential customers. Among them, Europe seems to be one of the best, as it consumes large amounts of gas and, at the same time, it is trying to reduce its dependence on Russia.Of course, the most feasible route for Iranian gas to Europe would be via Turkey, but the existing Tabriz-Ankara pipeline is not large enough for major exports. So, Tehran has long lobbied to build a designated pipeline that would connect its huge South Pars gas field with European customers – the so-called Persian pipeline. Simultaneously, it’s pursuing other plans, as the shipping of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe via Spain, as Iranian oil minister said in September, after a meeting with his Spanish counterpart in Tehran.The problem is that the country’s infrastructure is outdated and stalled, mainly because of the Western sanctions. As a matter of fact, it has no ability to freeze its gas into LNG for tanker exports beyond the reach of pipelines. So, despite all the ambitious plans, their realization might take a long time, with some analysts suggesting Iran won’t be able to make any significant progress before at least one or even two years.
Erdogan threatens Russia, but...Turkish president Tayyip Erdogan has threatened Russia that his country could find another supplier of natural gas and someone else who would be able to build its first nuclear plant. The recent deterioration in the relations between Ankara and Moscow comes as a result of the intense Russian bombings in Syria, which are changing the rules of the game in the country, helping Bashar al-Assad, a declared enemy of Turkey, survive. “These are matters for Russia to consider. If the
77
Clouds of uncertainty for TAP and DESFA
Azerbaijan and the EU have been playing a game of substance and impression in the recent weeks. A game which already makes the future of two big energy projects, the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) and the privatization of the Greek gas distribution system (DESFA) seem more uncertain than ever before.According to EurActiv and the Reuters news agency, a resolution adopted recently by the European Parliament has triggered strong reactions in Baku, who blames Brussels for manipulation actions and “dirty” political games against Azerbaijan. The resolution, adopted with the votes of Socialists & Democrats, GUE-NGL (European Left), ALDE (Liberals) and the Greens – the largest parliamentary group, the European People’s Party, voted
against – calls for the negotiations for a Strategic Partnership Agreement with the country to be immediately put on hold, blaming Baku for not taking concrete steps in the direction of respecting universal human rights.The decision was followed by an extraordinary plenary session of the Azeri Parliament, with its speaker, Ogtay Asadov, publicly condemning “an organized political action” and the “political games (…) deliberately planned and carried out” against his country.At the same time, diplomatic sources told EurActiv that the European Parliament’s resolution had greatly contributed to Baku’s disenchantment with the EU, and that there was a true risk that Azerbaijan would decide to sell
all its gas to Turkey and “forget about the EU” and, of course, the TAP, which is aimed to be connected to the Trans-Anatolian Pipeline (TANAP), near the Greek-Turkish border.As for the case of DESFA, Baku is already at odds with the European Commission, after the in-depth investigation opened by the European authorities almost a year ago, in November 2014, to determine whether the acquisition of a 66 percent stake in the Greek company by SOCAR, in 2013, is in line with EU’s so-called Third Energy Package. The clouds are getting darker…
Russians don’t build the Akkuyu (the nuclear plant to be constructed by Rosatom) someone will come and build it”, said Erdogan on October 8, adding that “we are Russia’s number one natural gas consumer. Losing Turkey would be a serious loss for Russia. If necessary, Turkey can get its natural gas from many different places”.However, many analysts express doubts about Turkey’s ability to diversify its energy supplies quickly and effectively in a case of crisis with Russia. “Erdogan’s statements on gas are not realistic at all. Turkey is dependent on Russia in both short and medium terms”, said a private-sector gas official speaking to Reuters. “No gas entry from Thrace means the end of Turkey as that gas pipeline feeds all of Istanbul and the
Marmara region. There is no alternative pipeline system that can bring this gas”, he added.Indeed, Ankara is buying 28-30 bcm of the 50 bcm of natural gas it needs annually from Russia. And the Trans Anatolian Pipeline (TANAP), in which Turkey has a 30 percent stake, is expected to bring 6 bcm of Azeri gas only after mid-2018, when the pipeline is supposed to become operational. Difficult times for sultans...
8
03EU sEEks “dEal for a cEntUry” in Paris sUmmitUntil now, the kyoto Protocol and other climate deals have failed to deliver in terms of preventing the rise of mean temperatures. can the Paris summit in december change the rules of the game? anyway, everyone should remember that besides ethics, governments and experts are dealing with a huge economic challenge: according to certain experts, any deal is expected to drive action by businesses and influence how an estimated $90 trillion in new private and public infrastructure is built over the next 20 years.
overviewGeorge Pavlopoulos
Which deal is going to be finalized by the 190 or more nations that are taking part at the UN conference on climate change, starting in Paris on November 30? Is it going to be a deal like all the previous ones, which will ultimately make no difference and will not help maintain the rise of the mean temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial times? Or will it be a binding deal for all, developed and developing nations, creating hope for a better and more manageable future, like most governments and scientists seem to be aiming at?
At the beginning of one of the latest rounds of UN negotiations in Bonn, on October 19-23, a new 34 page long draft text was presented, which many climate experts and negotiators described as “manageable”. French Foreign minister Laurent Fabius, the person who will lead the summit, described the text as “balanced and ambitious”, which could be used as a starting point for the Paris summit. Peter Betts, lead negotiator for the EU, said the new draft text was a “useful tool” but warned there was still a long way to go.
“We do not want the Paris agreement with commitments ending by 2030 because the Paris agreement cannot be an agreement that starts in 2010 or 2021 and finishes in 2030, like the Kyoto Protocol, which finishes in 2020”, said Miguel Arias Canete, the Climate and Energy Commissioner, adding that “we want a binding agreement, but we want a deal which is valid for the entire century”. “If it is just an agreement which finishes in 2030 and lacks ambition, it does not solve the problem of the actual gap that we have already seen when we have analyzed the plans of 150 countries”, the Commissioner said.
According to Fabius, until the end of October, more than 150 nations had submitted national plans for action beyond 2020, representing almost 90 percent of emissions. And the EU was the first major economy to deliver its plan in March, promising to cut emissions by at least 40 percent by 2030 compared to 1990 levels.
But Christiana Figueres, the UN’s climate chief, said that it had been
9
obvious for a long time that the existing pledges would not be enough to limit warming to the goal of 2 degrees. And the OECD, from its part, has warned that plans already published by rich nations and major emerging countries are not enough to meet the targets set. As for Pricewaterhouse Coopers (PwC), the global accountancy and consulting firm, those plans – if carried out… – would hold global temperature increases by the turn of the century to 3 degrees Celsius, below the current 4 degrees trajectory, but still well above the target of 2 degrees.
So, who should we blame for the insufficient plans and especially if there is no bonding agreement in Paris? Right now, “countries are doing what they think is possible, not what is necessary”, says Nick Mabey, the head of E3G, a European organization pushing for a faster transition to sustainable development. And Pete Ogden, a former White House head of climate change and now with the Center of American Progress, agrees that countries will continue to negotiate in their own interest, but adds that interest now
includes faster action on climate change.
A report by 18 civil society groups including Christian Aid, Oxfam, The International Trade Union Confederation and WWF International, concludes that the ambition of all major developed countries falls well short of their fair shares”. The report said the rich countries could afford to shift from fossil fuels to cleaner energies, while helping others and have more responsibility because they have benefited from burning coal, oil and natural gas since the Industrial Revolution.
It estimates that the United States and the EU have promised about a fifth of their “fair shares”, while Japan has promised about a tenth. “Across the board, rich countries are failing to bring the two most important ingredients to the negotiating table – emission cuts and money”, points out one of the report’s authors.
On the contrary, it finds that emerging economies’ plans “exceed or broadly meet” their fair share. China, for instance, was found doing more counting its emissions since 1950,
“there is goodwill to achieve an agreement. How ambitious? We are on the ambitious side, other people are not so ambitious. so we have to negotiate”. – miguel arias canete, EU climate and Energy commissioner
10
while Brazil was contributing two-thirds of its fair share.
Even if the participants in the Paris summit manage to overcome all the above mentioned issues, experts warn that without a robust system that ensures countries will live up to their promises, “Paris has to deliver a credible system for monitoring, reporting and verification”, as countries will be left
to carry out their climate plans on their own”, pointed Jairam Ramesh, a former Indian environment minister who lead his country’s negotiating team at the Copenhagen talks in 2009.
the German chancellor angela merkel, french President francois Hollande, President of the Philippines Benigno aquino iii, are among the world leaders who have issued a joint statement through the World Bank urging governments and businesses to set up carbon markets and tax carbon emissions.
obama wants to be the “climate president”
On October 20, the White House announced that 68 companies had joined the 13 original signatories to the “American Business Act on Climate Pledge”. Among them are Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Nike, Ikea, Intel, Berkshire Hathaway Energy and others. But although the 81 companies (with a total market capitalization of more than $5 trillion) include a handful of energy companies, large oil and gas companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron are notably absent.
A few days earlier, the executives of
eight major companies in the energy sector held an unprecedented joint press conference in Paris, calling for an “effective” agreement in the UN summit in December. But while promising to collaborate on limiting gas flaring at refineries, they failed to find common ground on a mechanism for carbon pricing. And they stopped short of outlining goals to cut their own emissions. “We have both international oil companies and national oil companies and some of the nations have a different view on carbon pricing as a group”, BP executive officer Bob Dudley said.
12
04“Yellow... CARD” foR GReen eneRGY in euRope?with the energy & Climate package in 2009 the european union set a bright future for the renewables for the period until 2020. The Renewable energy Directive (2009/28/eC) stipulated a compulsory target for the eu to reach a 20% share of ReS in the final energy consumption until 2020. in 2015 it appears that this target will be achieved, even if not all of the national compulsory targets are met. where are we heading from here on? Are we going to see a second step in the same direction or might there be a change of mind?
RenewablesAtanas Georgiev*
The first Energy & Climate package of the EU was a bold step towards a low-carbon future. However, this policy was intended to work well in a specific international environment: - a projected economic growth in the years 2009-2020 (the projections were made before the crisis of 2008); - a high-enough price of carbon quotas for fossil fuel power generation - a firm belief, that the Kyoto Protocol would have a successor before its end in 2012 (still not a fact); - a leadership of European R&D, know-how, and production in the sector of green energy technologies.
The EU even took the pledge to increase its climate targets, should a new global climate accord be reached. Making the first step in this direction should have encouraged global partners and competitors, from North America to Asia, to follow-up and take similar measures. The hopes and expectations were the main reason to neglect some of the first “bugs” in the European electricity market, caused by the inconsistencies between the Energy & Climate package and the Third Energy
Package. While the former gives a priority dispatch and provides models for subsidizing renewable energy, the latter requires an equal access of all generators to the European electricity grids and stimulates producer-to-producer competition in a market with no regulated prices for energy.
However, recent data show that “energy only” market experiences lower prices, while the “subsidies” market generates higher and higher prices per kilowatt-hour, which do not fit well into the Internal Energy Market infrastructure. Even when market coupling occurs (most of the countries in the EU currently operate under such rules) and wholesale prices of electricity equalize, still consumers in different countries pay different costs for subsidizing renewable energy. Thus there are more and more incentives for energy-intensive industries to move out.
It is extremely difficult to combine the policy objectives for a fully liberalized electricity market in Europe, defined by the Third Energy Package, with the objectives for the support of specific
13
energy resources through the obligations in the RES Directive. Even though the Energy and Climate Package should have supported all low-carbon options, including nuclear, later developments show that renewable energy got most of the policy support in many member-states. In addition to this, the price of carbon did not reach the levels, predicted before the economic crisis of 2008, eventually leading to increased availability and production by coal-fired thermal power plants. This effect has been intensified by the export of cheap coal from the United States as a result of the shale gas boom there.
off-grid and off-costSeveral studies carried out during the previous year show that there may be a more important change under way – one that could shake traditional electric systems globally. Sharing costs between all users connected to a national grid increases incentives for single consumers to opt out. The projected cost of a small gas cogeneration unit (for small/large industries and even for office buildings) as well as the projected cost for solar panels and batteries is
decreasing in the next years. At the same time, the projected cost of the RES subsidies in consumer bills are rising. This could eventually lead consumers out of the grid.
The US-based Rocky Mountain Institute initially called this trend “Grid Defection”, meaning that consumers would choose to go completely off-grid in the next decade. Now, in a more recent report from this year they are forecasting a “Load Defection”, in an analysis of the US market. Explained in short, this trend means that consumers will stay connected to the grid, but would use it only as a backup when their own sources are not producing enough energy. When this trend gains pace, these consumers will pay less for the
fixed costs of the respective national energy system – meaning grid tariffs and RES subsidies. In turn, this will lead to higher unit costs for the consumers who are still fully on-grid, thus increasing their incentives to also go off the grid.
According to the second report, solar-plus-battery systems rapidly become cost effective and new customers will find them most economic in three of the five explored geographies within the next 10–15 years. The analysis forecasts the situation in 5 cities in different states of the USA: Honolulu (Hawaii), Los Angeles (California), Louisville (Kentucky), San Antonio (Texas), and Westchester (New York).
In addition, between 2010 and 2030, the grid in the United States will require up to an estimated $2 trillion in investments, or about $100 billion per year, the report says. According to the RMI, currently those costs are to be recovered through revenues from energy sales, which means, that “if even a small fraction of the kWh sales supporting that investment and revenue is lost, it will likely have a large impact on system economics”.
Are we going ahead as planned or might there be a pause in the energy and climate policy?
14
This is not simply a forecast. Owners of office buildings in Germany are already exploring this option in order to save from their Energiewende costs, while industrial consumers seek gas-turbine solutions. This trend is good for the development of distributed renewable energy sources, but it also means that the current model for accommodating grid-connected RES may be endangered.
low-carbon vs. low-carbonOne of the strange effects of liberalization and climate policies combined was the replacement of old low-carbon technologies with new ones, while carbon-intensive fossil fuels kept their shares. The Nuclear Energy Agency of OECD published a report this year, called “Nuclear New Build: Insights into Financing and Project Management”, where its conclusion is that the liberalized electricity markets which set prices according to the variable costs of marginal technology, generate “a bias against capital-intensive technologies”.
According to the report, the lack of compensations (carbon taxes, etc.) would favor carbon-intensive fossil-fuel technologies such as gas and coal, while low-carbon generation (such as nuclear, hydro or renewables) may be disadvantaged in liberalized electricity markets. The reason for this is that the investors in capital-intensive technologies are exposed to greater financial risks than the ones who invest in less capital-intensive technologies. Another general conclusion of the OECD report, related to liberalization
and prices, is that “investors will not choose the technology with the lowest possible average lifetime costs but the technology that minimizes their overall investment risk”, which renders the idea that “competitive markets create a level playing field for all technologies” invalid.
It is true that we can see new nuclear build developed only under fully regulated electricity markets. Nuclear plants in the USA, for instance, are being built only in states that did not go through liberalization. This is not possible in the EU.
Market hurdlesAs the Executive Director of ACER Mr. Alberto Pototsching suggests, “… in an integrated European energy market, security of supply (and other energy mix related issues) is no longer exclusively a national consideration, but should be addressed as a regional and pan-European issue”. What he means is that generation and resource adequacy should be addressed and coordinated at a regional and European level in order to increase the positive effects of the Internal Energy Market and to avoid distortions in the market. This will be one of the main challenges for the European electricity market in the coming years.
On July 15th, 2015, the European Commission announced its “Summer Energy Package”, which paves the way for a new legislative change, which could be eventually turned into a “ 4th Energy Package”. According to the official press-release, the Commission
it is extremely difficult to combine the policy objectives for a fully liberalized electricity market in europe, defined by the Third energy package, with the objectives for the support of specific energy resources through the obligations in the ReS Directive.
15
has started a Public Consultation on the new electricity market design. One of the aims of the reform is to “facilitate investments, notably in renewables and low carbon generation”. Even though nuclear is not mentioned per se, the widening of the support schemes from renewables just to renewables plus low-carbon (including nuclear) could be expected. The fact-sheet, provided by the European Commission together with the press-release, states, that one of the prerequisites for a flexible electricity market is to ensure, that the markets provide “the right signals for investments in generation and the efficient use of available resources”.
The Commission also wants to “reap maximum benefits from cross-border competition and allow decentralized electricity generation” and to help consumers “to generate and consume their own energy under fair conditions in order to save money, help the environment, and ensure security of supply”.
These goals have to be accommodated in the current market environment. The European electricity market is getting more and more national ones together under the market coupling rules, while national regulations still
differ substantially. The energy mix and wholesale market regulation soon may be too difficult to regulate nationally. However, still there is no readiness to regulate them regionally as well.
low-carbon options for the futureIt remains to be seen whether the enthusiasm of 2008-2009 will repeat itself during the finalization of the 2030 climate & energy targets. The signs from last year show, that it is being replaced by more pragmatism. The EU has already taken the pledge to show its carbon reduction commitment, should there be an international accord.
We have to consider the altered economic situation in Europe as well. The Greek economic crisis, the situation in Ukraine, the growing number of migrants, as well as the global economic factors – the Chinese market for example, all affect the EU economy in a negative way. Energy poverty, especially in newer member-states such as Bulgaria, is an issue as well. The Industry’s competitiveness in comparison to other countries, where energy has higher carbon intensity, but lower prices, is also part of the picture. This may affect the future low-carbon policies of the EU.
On the positive note, we may see a global climate accord as early as December, when COP21 will take place in Paris.
(*) Atanas Georgiev is Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration of Sofia University, Bulgaria, where he teaches Regulatory Economics and Utilities Management to grad students. Atanas is also a lecturer at the “Energy Diplomacy” courses, organized by the Diplomatic Institute in the Bulgarian Foreign Affairs Ministry. He is the publisher and chief editor of the Bulgarian “Utilities” magazine and the online portal Publics.bg, as well as a frequent author of articles in other energy-related publications. Atanas graduated from the “Economics and Management in Infrastructure, Energy, and Utilities” program at Sofia University and later visited trainings on Energy Pricing in the Public Utilities Research Center (Florida, USA), EU Energy Law at the Florence School of Regulation (Italy), Infrastructure Economics at the Turin School of Local Regulation (Italy), Energy Security at the Masaryk University (Czech Republic), etc. He is member of the International Association for Energy Economics and of the Scientific Committee at the Turin School of Local Regulation.
16
05Global temperatures risinG despite national pledGespledges by nations to cut carbon emissions will fall far short of those needed to prevent global temperatures rising by more than the crucial 20C by the end of the century. this is the stark conclusion of climate experts who have analyzed submissions in the runup to the paris climate talks later this year.
overviewYiannis Pispirigos
A rise of 20C is considered the most the Earth could tolerate without risking catastrophic changes to food production, sea levels, fishing, wildlife, deserts and water reserves. Even if rises are pegged at 20C, scientists say this will still destroy most coral reefs and glaciers and melt significant parts of the Greenland ice cap, bringing major rises in sea levels.
lack of ambition“We have had a global temperature rise of almost 10C since the industrial revolution and have already seen widespread impacts that have had real consequences on people”, said climate expert Professor Chris Field of Stanford University. “We should therefore be striving to limit warming to as far below 20C as possible. However, that will require a level of ambition that we have not yet seen”.
In advance of the COP21 United Nations climate talks to be held in Paris from 30 November to 11 December, every country was asked to submit proposals on cutting use of fossil fuels in order to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases and so
tackle global warming. The deadline for these pledges was 1 October.
A total of 147 nations made submissions, and scientists have since been totting up how these would affect climate change. They have concluded they still fall well short of the amount needed to prevent a 20C warming by 2100, a fact that will be underlined when the Grantham Research Institute releases its analysis of the COP21 submissions. This will show that the world’s carbon emissions, currently around 50bn tonnes a year, will still rise over the next 15 years, even if all the national pledges made to the UN are implemented. The institute’s figures suggest they will reach 55bn to 60bn by 2030.
Co2 emissions continue to riseTo put that figure in context, the world will have to cut emissions to 36bn billion tonnes of carbon to have a 50-50 chance of keeping temperatures below 20C, scientists have calculated. Current pledges will not bring the planet near that reduced output. Developed nations may pledge to make increasing
17
use of renewable energy sources but as more developing nations become industrialised, carbon outputs continue to rise overall. And there is no prospect of nations now changing their carbon pledges before or during the Paris talks.
The world is therefore falling well short of its carbon target – though there are some grounds for relative optimism. A study of COP21 pledges by Climate Action Tracker, (CAT) an independent scientific group of European climate experts, indicates that if all pledges are implemented, then global temperatures will rise by 2.70C. The group revealed that this is a significant improvement on the warming it predicted last year. “Our December update included pledges and informal announcements by China, the US and the EU, and we estimated an average global warming level of 3.10C,” said CAT member Dr Louise Jeffery of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. “The biggest contributing factors to the change in our temperature estimate have been China and India”.
These nations had been on track to become major carbon emitters but this year issued pledges that have raised hopes they will greatly curtail their outputs, increasing some negotiators’ hopes for Paris.
This point was backed by climate economist Lord Stern: “We can already
see that the pledges by national governments will mean emissions after 2020 will fall far short of cuts needed to have a reasonable chance of avoiding global warming of more than 20C. It is essential therefore, that a legal agreement is agreed at the COP21 talks in order to create a process after Paris through which countries will review their efforts and find ways to ramp up their actions on reducing emissions”.
Financial problemsA major stumbling block facing negotiators at Paris will be finance. Developed nations – who are responsible for most carbon emissions – have to find ways to pay developing nations so that they can adopt renewable energy technologies and find ways to cope with changes in their environments. Given that this will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, there is considerable room for political fallout. Nevertheless, Field remained optimistic: “The climate change problem is one that can be solved. We have the technologies, the resources – we just need to make the commitment”.
“We should therefore be striving to limit warming to as far below 20C as possible. However, that will require a level of ambition that we have not yet seen” – Chris Field, climate expert professor of stanford university
18
06Romania in the fiRst places of euRope’s “gReen league”Romania has, according to estimates, already reached its renewable energy target for 2020, which means that 24% of the energy consumption is produced from green resources.
RenewablesAda Gavrilescu
According to a recent report by the European Commission, Romania is one of the 25 EU member states that meet both targets set for 2013-2014 (19.7%) and most probably the target for 2020 (24%) regarding renewable energy. Thus, in 2013 Romania already registered a 23.9% share of the total energy consumed coming from such sources.
The European Commission report shows that the entire European Union has made progress towards the target of increasing the share of renewable energy to 20% of total consumption by 2020. With a share of renewable energy estimated at 15.3% of gross final energy consumption in 2014, the report estimates that the EU and most Member States are progressing satisfactorily.
a real successRegarding the use of renewable energy in transport, the estimated rate is 5.7% for 2014. Achieving the 10% target set for 2020 is challenging, but remains possible, since some Member States have good progress.
“The report shows once again that the
production and consumption of energy from renewable sources is a success at a European level. In Europe, the amount of renewable energy per capita is three times higher than elsewhere in the world. We have over 1 million people working in the renewable energy sector and the sector’s value exceeds 130 billion per year. The export of renewable energy amounts to 35 billion euros per year”, said Miguel Arias Canete, the commissioner for Climate and Energy.
Every two years, the report monitors the progress of EU and Member States towards achieving renewable energy targets, legally binding set in the Directive on the subject, adopted in 2009. The report also includes, a feasibility assessment which provides a consumption target of 10% renewable energy in transport and sustainable sources using biofuels and bioliquids.
The EU legislation that promotes the use of renewable energy is in force since 2001, when the first Directive on the promotion and use of electricity from renewable sources was adopted, followed in 2003 by the directive on the use of
19
biofuels and other fuels from renewable sources in the transport sector.
Back to incentivesIn spite of the good position in this report, the Romanian government is considering changes to a support program for renewable energy after a cut in incentives last year that made many wind and solar power projects unprofitable.
Energy Minister Andrei Gerea said the cabinet in Bucharest is talking with companies and the energy-market regulator about a solution that would make investments in renewable energy “profitable again”.
Until new incentives are announced, companies such as CEZ AS, Enel SpA and GDF Suez have put investment plans on hold, according to officials from the three companies.
“Romania is not yet in a situation to say: OK, we met our 2020 renewable energy goal, and that’s it”, Gerea said earlier this year, according to Bloomberg. “We have to continue investing in capacities because we can export and get money”. The minister didn’t give any details about
the planned changes.
enormous billsLast year, Romania joined other countries in Europe such as Spain, France, Italy and the U.K. in curtailing aid for renewable power. The intention was to avoid overcompensating companies and to limit electricity-price increases for consumers.
Companies such as Iberdrola (Spain) responded by scrapping investment plans in wind or solar parks. Romania has an installed capacity of more than
4.500 megawatts of renewable energy generation plants.
By cutting in half of the number of the so called “green certificates” granted for each megawatt of power produced from wind, Romania forced companies that funded millions of Euros of new generation plants to reconsider how they will recover their investments.
“We are not in the positive business case, and it’s a complicated situation that I hope is going to be settled soon”, said Martin Zmelik, the head of CEZ’s Romanian unit.
“I’m not saying that we expect the government to return to past commitments. But we need predictability, which we don’t have”.
The Czech Republic’s largest producer of electricity said in April 2014 that it’s considering the sale of its 600-megawatt wind park in Romania because of incentive changes in the country. The company will focus on nuclear power at home instead. It later said it would reconsider this decision and scrapped the discussions about finding a buyer.
“We are not in the positive business case, and it’s a complicated situation that i hope it’s going to be settled soon” - martin Zmelik, the head of ceZ’s Romanian unit.
20
07Serbia will hardly meet the targetS of 2020Since the introduction of feed-in tariffs in 2009, the legal and regulatory framework for using renewable energy sources in Serbia improved significantly. however, due to slow investment activities the country is expected to fall short of the mandatory 27% target of energy from renewable sources in the country’s gross final energy consumption by 2020.
renewablesStevan Veljovic
In the beginning of October investments in using renewable energy sources become a hot-topic in Serbian media. However, this attention was given for the wrong reasons. What attracted the attention was not given because of an investment, but because of an alleged wiretapping incident related to the large wind farm project developed by Continental Wind Partners, CWP.
Apart from a heated political dispute between the ruling and opposition party, there is little debate on the actual developments in the renewable energy sector, which is of huge importance for Serbia’s energy safety in the future.
Under Directive 2009/28/EC, Serbia committed to increase the share of energy from renewable sources in its gross final energy consumption from 21.2% in 2009 to 27% by 2020.
In June 2013, the Government adopted the National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP), which envisages that the overall target will be achieved by increasing the renewable energy shares in electricity from 28.7% to 36.6%,
from 28.7% to 30% for heating and cooling and from 0% to 10 % in the transport sector.
To meet the target in the electricity sector, Serbia is expected to add 1.092 MW of new capacities for the production of electricity from renewable energy sources by 2020.
Both Energy Community reports and experts warn that, despite improvements in legal and regulatory framework, Serbia will hardly meet the 27% binding target for 2020 because of the slow pace of investments.
hydro power plantsThe 27% target has been set based on estimated usable potential of renewable energy sources in Serbia, of 5.6 Mtoe per annum. According to the National renewable action plan, the greatest potential are biomass (approximately 3.4 Mtoe per year, out of which only 1.1 Mtoe was used) and hydropotential (1.7 Mtoe). Much less is available in geothermal energy (0.2 Mtoe), wind energy (0.1 Mtoe) and solar energy (0.2 Mtoe).
21
For years, the use of renewable energy sources was based mainly on electricity generation from large river courses and the use of biomass mostly for household heating. The National action plan predicted that in 2020 a new 1.092 megawatts will be added in total. The greatest contribution is expected from hydro power plants, 338 megawatts and wind energy, 500 megawatts. For wind energy this is the maximum available capacity, while intermediate cap of 300 MW is set until the end of 2015. For solar energy, there is a cap of 10 MW until 2020, out of which approximately 7MW were already installed by the end of 2014.
According to the Progress Report on the Implementation of the National action plan, from 2009, when the legal framework with incentive measures was first introduced, until December 2014, 45 megawatts of new plants for the production of electricity from renewable energy sources had been installed. This include 45 small hydropower plants capacity of 33.5MW, 72 solar power plants of 6.7MW in total and one wind power plant with the capacity of 0.5MW. Also, five biogas power plants were built, with a total capacity of approximately 4.1MW.
The reconstructions of the existing hydro power plants within the EPS system have additionally increased the total installed capacity of the hydropower plants, which led to an actual increase in the RES utilization by an additional 106 MW.
The experts confirm that improvements in the legal and regulatory framework in the past two years encouraged the development of the renewable energy sector. Maja Turkovic, expert for renewable energy sources said that the 2014 Energy Law brought positive changes related to project financing, by introducing a one-step Power Purchase Agreement, which reduces uncertainty with regard to financing projects.
“Furthermore, the introduction of a force majeure clause during construction, and the extension of the construction completion period from two to three years reduced the construction risk for investors and lenders. All these issues are particularly important with regard to the construction of large renewable
energy projects. The Law also defined permitting and construction authority and obligations for overhead power lines and transformer stations that can be financed and possibly built by private investors, but ultimately remains under the ownership and management of the national grid operator”, she explained.
However, she insisted there are still pending unresolved issues in the Energy Law that should be properly addressed in associated secondary legislation, including transferability of the Power Purchase Agreement and protection against legislative amendments that could impact negatively on the project’s revenues.
“The majority of by-laws, governing
rising cost of incentives
In Serbia, the feed-in tariff model for stimulating investments in renewable energy sources was introduced in 2009 and updated in 2011 and 2013. Generators of energy from renewable sources are considered to be privileged producers. They are exempted from balancing responsibilities and balancing costs during the entire 12-year period for which they are entitled to feed-in tariffs.
The feed-in tariffs are paid by the state-owned electricity incumbent EPS Supply which is under the obligation to purchase all renewable
electricity generated by privileged producers under power purchase agreements.
The feed-in tariff is adopted in EUR/MWh and indexed with the inflation rate in the Eurozone. For 2015, the renewable energy surcharge levied on end-users has been increased to 0.093 RSD/kWh (ca. 0,001 EUR/kWh) from 0.081 RSD/kWh in 2014.
In 2014, EPS Snabdevanje, the retail branch of EPS, paid RSD 2.73 billion [€22.75 million] to privileged producers of electricity in 2014, almost eight times more than in 2013.
22
licensing requirements, permitting procedure, privileged producers’ status, supply and grid requirements, has been issued and regularly updated, with the exception of the Power Purchase Agreement for large projects (particularly wind), which is still pending”, she said.
Dejan Stojadinovic, expert for renewable energy sources noted that reasons for the slow pace of investments could be specific for certain areas of renewable energy sources. “For wind energy, the purchase price of electricity is attractive, but other conditions are not fulfilled. In the case of biomass, the problem is to ensure long term supply of biomass from the Srbijasume company”, he explained.
target missingIn its annual implementation report, published on October 8th, the Energy Community concluded that investments in the renewable energy sector in Serbia remain minimal. The report reminded that in 2011 and 2012 the renewable
energy share of Serbia was above its National renewable energy action plan, and even though the renewable energy share decreased slightly to 19.1% in 2013, it was still in line with its target. “According to the modelling results with current policies and planned policy initiatives, the renewable energy target in 2020 will be increased to 25.9% in the best case, below the NREAP target of 27%, which means the target will be missed by 1% in 2020“, the report said.
Commenting on the report, Maja Turkovic noted that in spite of the improvements in the legal and regulatory framework, in practice, the investment activities remain modest. This is the case mainly in small hydro power plants (i.e. projects below 10 MW), followed by solar and biogas plants – with the total capacity of all projects eligible for the feed-in tariff in the range of 5% of the planned 1.092 megawatts.
“It is highly unlikely that we can catch up during the next five years and meet its obligations, i.e. mandatory targets for 2020”, she said, adding that there is a number of reasons for this very drastic delay and lack of investment activities in the renewable energy sector. “They range from unnecessary regulatory barriers; infrastructure constraints; inadequate resource assessment; complex legal, social and political environments that make it extremely difficult to attract such large investments, as well as lack of regional cooperation. However, this gap could be narrowed significantly if hydro, and
both energy Community reports and experts warn that, despite improvements in legal and regulatory framework, Serbia will hardly meet the 27% binding target for 2020 because of the slow pace of investments.
ePS keeping up with the market
On top of ongoing the planned reconstructions of larger hydro power plants, in the EPS system, the company also started the revitalization of its 15 small hydro power plants 35 to 80 years old, with a €32.7 million EBRD loan.
The signing of the agreement with
KfW worth EUR 80 million for financing the construction of the wind and solar park in Kostolac is expected in 2016. The loan, supported with approximately €25 million of EPS own investment, will be used to build a wind farm capacity of around 60 MW and solar park, capacity of 10 MW.
23
particularly large wind projects, are constructed and made operational.”
The wind power plants stand as the only renewable energy source that could be scaled up quickly enough to the replacements in the thermal power plant capacities which will be decommissioned in the near future, in line with the Large Combustion Plant Directive. “There is a pipeline of wind projects in advanced development phase in excess of the currently
imposed cap of 500 MW. Nearly 800 MW in wind projects recently applied for preliminary privileged producer’s status, striving to secure a place in the quota”, said Maja Turkovic.
Alongside the large-scale wind power generation, solar PV and all other sources of distributed generation - small hydro, biomass, biogas, waste, and geothermal - should have a dominant role in Serbia’s renewable energy mix, she added.
Small hydro power plants were the best performer among all renewable energy sources and will continue to develop in the future, while further deployment of solar PV naturally implies a cap increase. “Both issues of feed-in tariffs and caps in solar technology must be addressed accordingly, as the costs of technology decrease over time”, she noted.
Dejan Stojadinovic believed that renewable energy sources could cover up to 30% to 40% of Serbia’s energy needs in the next five to ten years, which requires increasing investment in new plants. “It is possible to install around 1.000 to 2.000 MW of new capacities in wind energy”, he said, adding that reaching maximum capacities would require significant investments in the transport network. “As for small hydro power plants, the realistic expectation is to introduce approximately 200 to 300 MW”, he concluded.
Production of electricity from reS from new plants in 2020 according to the National renewable energy action Plan type of reS mw gw Share (%) Hydro power plants (over 10 MW) 250 1108 30.3 Small hydro power plants (up to 10 MW) 188 592 16.2 Wind energy 500 1000 27.4 Solar energy 10 13 0.4 Biomass – CHP plants 100 640 17.5 Biogas (manure) – CHP plants 30 225 6.2 Geothermal energy 1 7 0.2 Waste 3 18 0.5 Landfill gas 10 50 1.4
Total planned capacity 1092 3653 100
24
08The cosT of renewable energy sources in serbiaofficials think that renewable energy sources in serbia with an estimated technically usable potential of about 5.6 Mtoe per annum can have a considerable contribution to a lesser utilization of fossil fuels and achievement of defined targets regarding the share of renewable sources in the gross final energy consumption (gfec), as well as regarding the improvement of environment.
renewablesVladimir Spasic
In the last two years Serbian consumers paid 3.07 billion dinars (€26 million) to energy entities with privileged electricity producer status that are producing energy from renewable energy sources (RES). The largest costs are expected when wind farms begin producing electricity. The State has made a commitment for 12 years to pay 1.1 billion euros to the owners of the 500 MW wind farms for the production of 1.000 GWh. There are many companies interested to acquire a share of this and it does not come as any surprise that currently there is an ongoing investigation into the allegations that a high Government official demanded €2 million from the US company Continental Wind Partners to connect their wind park to the power grid.
what does serbia have?The biomass potential amounts to approximately 3.4 Mtoe per year (2.3 Mtoe per year is unused, and 1.1 Mtoe is used), 1.7 Mtoe lies in hydropotential (0.8 Mtoe per year is unused, and 0.9 Mtoe per year is the used), 0.2 Mtoe per year in geothermal energy, 0.1 Mtoe per year in wind energy, 0.2 Mtoe per year in
solar energy and 0.04 Mtoe per year in biodegradable part of waste. Out of the total available technical potential of RES, Serbia already uses 35% - 0.9 Mtoe of used hydro-potential and 1.06 Mtoe of used biomass and geothermal potential.
In 2013, the National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP) was adopted. This document sets the targets for the use of renewable energy sources until 2020, as well as the manner of their achievement. Among other things, it aims to enhance investments into the field of renewable energy sources.
The Ministry of Mining and Energy says that the preparation of the NREAP in the presented form of questions and answers results from the international commitment undertaken by the Republic of Serbia in 2006 by the Law on Ratification of the Treaty Establishing Energy Community between the European Community and the Republic of Albania, the Republic of Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia, the FYROM, the Republic of Montenegro, Romania, the Republic of Serbia and the United Nation Interim
25
Administration Mission in Kosovo in compliance with Resolution 1244 of the UN Security Council.
“Pursuant to Article 20 of the Energy Community Treaty, Serbia accepted the commitment to apply European Directives in the field of renewable energy sources - Directive 2001/77/EC for the promotion of electricity from renewable energy sources and Directive 2003/30/EC on the promotion of biofuels or other fuels produced from renewable energy sources for transport. Since 2009, these Directives were gradually replaced and in January 2012 they were repealed by a new Directive 2009/28/EC, dated 23 April 2009, on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC”, the Ministry stated.
feed-in tariffsThe National Renewable Energy Action Plan predicts incentive measures for RES which were first introduced in 2009. The main measure is feed-in tariffs. From then until December 2014 investors built 123 power plants. Most of them are solar power plants (72) and small hydropower plants (45).
In a feed-in tariff system, the power plant operators receive a fixed payment for each unit of electricity generated regardless of the electricity market price. The main advantage of the fixed feed-in system, as experienced in practice, is its high effectiveness and low risk premiums.
“Feed-in tariffs are specified every three years and can be reconsidered on an annual basis. Due to a dynamic change of investment costs into solar power plants, feed-in tariffs for privileged producers from this type of power plants are set once a year”, states a Decree on Incentives for Privileged Electricity Producers.
In compliance with the Reference (baseline) scenario (REFSC) of the Ministry, in the electricity sector, it will be necessary to achieve an increase of energy from RES from 884 ktoe to 1151 ktoe in order to fulfill international commitments undertaken by the Republic of Serbia, which is an increase of 30% of RES in the electricity sector until 2020. Expressed with respect to the Gross final energy consumption, this increase amounts to 2.4% - from 9.7% electricity from RES in 2009 to 12.1% in 2020. In order to achieve its targets in the electric power sector, Serbia plans to install an additional 1092 MW until 2020 of which almost half will be from wind.
Incentives for wind farms are now at 9.20 eurocents per kWh and the State promises it will pay them for 12 years. This means that the State must pay €92 million each year to the owners of the 500 MW wind farms and their planned production of 1.000 GWh. This money is and will be collected from consumers. Every single one of which is paying a special fee charged on their bills sent by their supplier. For most of them, it is the Electric Power Industry of Serbia (EPS). The special fee was 0.044 (€0.000389)
per kW/h in 2013 and more than double in 2014 - 0.093 (€0.00078). The amount of subsidies given through feed-in tariffs to energy entities which are producing energy from RES grew from €3 million in 2013 to 23 in 2014, as the number of entities from 71 in 2013 to 153 in 2014. Almost 80 percent of the money given to energy entities was collected from consumers.
But this is not all. There are balancing costs for wind farms. The Economics of Wind Energy, a report by the European Wind Energy Association, says that two main aspects determine the wind energy integration costs: balancing needs and grid infrastructure. The additional balancing cost in a power system arises from the inherently variable nature of wind power, requiring changes in the configuration,
in 2013, the national renewable energy action Plan (nreaP) was adopted. This document sets the targets for the use of renewable energy sources until 2020.
26
scheduling and operation of other generators to deal with unpredicted deviations between supply and demand.
Under the Power Purchase Agreement, the State guarantees investors zero balancing costs.
“The investor has the right to bear no balancing costs during the period covered by incentive measures. The investor is also given the guarantee that it will belong to the balance group of the public supplier which is the State owned Electric Power Industry of Serbia”, can be read in the Decree on Incentives for Privileged Electricity Producers.
The balancing cost is estimated at €2-4/MWh. For 500 MW wind farms it is €24 to 48 million. All of this will be expenses of the EPS.
Vice-president, sister, opposition party, wiretapped telephone conversation...The Serbian authorities gave preliminary licenses to investors for 500 MW wind farms. So far nobody has built anything. However, a few days ago wind turbines for MK Fintel Wind wind farm by Danube arrived in Serbia. This is a joint venture between Italy’s Fintel Energia Group and Serbian MK Group and the construction of a 9.9 MW wind power plant in the northern Serbian town Kula is scheduled to be completed by the end of the year.
A week earlier, the wind farm almost cost the Serbian government vice-president Kori Udovicki his position. And it is not over yet. On October 5th the Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic stated that the authorities would conduct a full investigation into the allegations made in a document published by Teleprompter, an online portal, claimed
to be the transcript of a wiretapped telephone conversation between the Prime Minister of the Serbian province Vojvodina Bojan Pajtic and Lidija Udovicki, in which she accused a public company Elektromreza Srbije (EMS) director of corruption. Lidija Udovicki’s husband is Mark Crandall, one of the Continental Wind Partners (CWP) owners. Lidija’s sister is Kori, Serbian government vice-president and Pajtic is leader of Serbia’s main opposition Democratic Party.
Everything started in mid September during the Prime Minister’s visit to the USA. He said that CWP was behind a letter criticizing Vucic written by five US Congress members to US Vice-President Joseph Biden. Vucic said that “some people tried to racketeer him” after they failed to get permission to build wind farms in Serbia. Nikola Petrovic, the director of EMS, is also widely believed to be close to PM Vucic.
The US company denied it is behind any campaign to discredit Prime Minister and denied receiving any demands from the EMS director. CWP also said that because it wanted to avoid conflicts of interest, it had decided that Mark Crandall should not negotiate with the Serbian administration after Kori Udovicki, his sister-in-law, became vice-president. Udovicki said that Vucic told her that she has his support and police started the investigation.
To be continued...
what has been built from 2009 when the feed-in tariffs were established for the first time - 45 Mw*
- 45 small hydropower plants with the total installed capacity of approximately 33.5MW
- 72 solar power plants with the capacity of 6.7MW
- 1 wind power plant with the capacity of 0.5MW, while 5 wind power plants with the total capacity of 45MW have gained the temporary privileged producer status
- 5 biogas power plants with the total capacity of around 4.1MW.
*Register of Privileged Electricity Producers
Online Telecom & Mobile Tech Magazine
news - smartphones - tablets - tech & gadgets - apps & games - TV
www.mobilenewsmag.com
Mobile News EU
@MobileNewsEU
28
09The new deposiT renders egypT an energy superpowerThe gigantic deposit that was located at a depth of 1.450 meters below sea level, covers an area of 100 square kilometers, is located at 190 kilometers from the coastline of egypt and has an estimated production capacity of up to 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, an equivalent of 5.5 billion barrels of oil and is the 20th largest in the world.
oil & gasPenelope Mitroulia
Significant changes in the energy and geo-strategic equilibriums of the eastern Mediterranean are expected to be caused by the discovery by the Italian energy giant Eni, of the giant Zohr gas deposit, just off the Egyptian coast.
The fact that the deposit is relatively close to the Mediterranean coasts of Egypt, that the quality of the gas is very good and that in the region already has existing infrastructure for processing and transferring natural gas, reduces production costs, making the Zohr deposit yet more profitable for Egypt and Eni. According to estimates by the EFG Hermes Holding SAE investment bank, the revenues that the Zohr deposit can generate for Egypt can even amount to 48 billion dollars.
“This historic discovery can well transform the energy scenario of Egypt”, said the CEO of Eni, Claudio Descalzi when he announced the discovery of the Zohr deposit in late August and added that the company intends to accelerate the production operations by drilling for the first pumping wells in 2016.
It must be noted that the energy giant Eni, with a capitalization of approximately 54 billion Euros, has been operating in Egypt for over 60 years via its subsidiary IEOC. It is one of the companies with the highest energy production in Egypt equivalent to 200,000 barrels per day. In June, Eni signed an en energy exploration agreement with the Egypt Petroleum Ministry worth 2 billion dollars, while there had been a cooperation memorandum in March to investigate the Sinai, the Gulf of Suez, the Mediterranean and the Nile Delta.
The benefits for egypt In order to comprehend the size of the Zohr deposit, it should be noted that the Leviathan deposit, which was discovered in 2010 in the territorial waters of Israel and was up until recently the largest in the Mediterranean, has the size of 17 trillion cubic meters of gas and according to Eni, the output from the exploitation of Zohr, is expected to be 37% larger than that of the Leviathan deposit.
The discovery of the Zohr deposit is a significant success for Egypt which is
29
facing an incessant lack of energy that has both political as well as financial consequences.
The lack of energy is largely due to the rapid population growth in Egypt during recent decades, causing very frequent blackouts and has forced the Egyptian government to impose restrictions to the supply of natural gas towards Egyptian industries, affecting their production and consequently the development of the Egyptian economy. Gas production has declined in Egypt by approximately 16% since 2013 and exports have fallen by 70% in comparison to 2009. On the contrary, the power consumption of the Egyptian households and industry has increased by 50% over the past decade.
It is estimated that the Zohr deposit can meet gas demand in Egypt for the upcoming decades while the prospect of exports is also likely, which seems to affect the strategy of Israel for the export of gas from its own reserves.
Mr. Descalzi of Eni has stated that production from the “Zohr” can reach its peak of three billion cubic meters
per day, covering 68% of the country’s current natural gas production that will enable Egypt to import no gas for the next ten years.
The Egyptian government intends to direct the largest part of the production from Zohr to the domestic market, according to Sherif Ismail, Egypt’s Petroleum Minister in an interview with Reuters. “The domestic market is a priority”, he stated, adding that Eni’s share of the Zohr deposit will rise to 35% while the remaining 65% will be controlled by the Egyptian government. According to Mr. Ismail, the government’s aim is to make Egypt energy independent by 2020. As far as future gas exports are concerned, the Egyptian Petroleum Minister stated that “we must be realistic ... we must fully meet the needs of the domestic market”.
While speaking to the US news network CNBC, Eni’s CEO also pointed out that the discovery “changed the entire game for Egypt. It is very important for the country itself but the Mediterranean as well as regards the stability in the broader region”.
The implications for israelThe discovery of the Zohr seems to encumber the export of natural gas from Israel to Egypt and attracted everyone’s attention towards the delays that have occurred in Israel to exploit the Leviathan and Tamar deposits, which are the two largest in the country. According to Barclays, the aim is to establish the regulatory framework so that up to 2025, Israel will be able to export 1.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas per day.
For Israel, the discovery of the Zohr deposit “is a poignant reminder of our truly foolish actions”, said the Energy Minister of Israel, Yuval Steinitz, speaking on the Israeli military radio station. “We delayed research for years. We delayed development. Nothing is moving”, added the Israeli minister.
However, despite the delays and implications caused by the existing regulatory framework, the development of the Leviathan deposit and the smaller one of Tamar is way ahead compared to the Zohr. The question is whether Cairo will prefer to avoid imports from Israel for political reasons.
30
Nevertheless, according to Bloomberg analysts, Shoshanna Solomon and Gabrielle Coppola, the discovery of the Zohr deposit, consists a blow to Israel’s effort to export natural gas for the first time in history to countries such as Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian territories.
The energy equilibrium in the eastern Mediterranean is now more favorable for Egypt rather than Israel and Cyprus, according to Sir Michael Leigh, which is a member of the German Marshall Fund think tank, based in Washington. “This is surely good news for Egypt. At first sight it is less ‘good news’ for Israel and would further complicate the decision-making process for potential natural gas exports”.
The implications for CyprusCyprus is seeking to highlight the positive dimension of the discovery of the Zohr deposit. As noted by analysts, the possibility that a part of the deposit may be in the Cypriot EEZ is important, while the discovery restores in a particularly intense manner the interest of major companies in the region that includes Egyptian and Cypriot grounds. These are the main initial positive effects, while the negative include reduction of the terminal liquefaction dependence on Cypriot and Israeli natural gas, something that Egypt reassured would not occur from the very first moment.
Regarding the possibility that a part of the Zohr deposit be in the Cypriot EEZ, experts note that the exact footprint
of the deposit must first be recorded, although given the extent of 100 sq. kilometers, the deposit should have a very narrow width and a very large length and formation opposite to the direction of the deposit formation sources (ie, the Nile), in order not to stretch into the Cypriot EEZ. It should be noted that in the case that the deposit extends within the Cypriot EEZ, the sharing agreements that already exist between Cyprus and Egypt will be activated. Already by the end of 2013, the Energy Minister of Cyprus Yiorgos Lakkotrypis, had signed an agreement for the development of hydrocarbon resources that extend from one side of the median line to another with his Egyptian counterpart.
Nevertheless, based on analyses of data from the Zohr deposit and block 11, the French Beicip-Flanlab had estimated that the gigantic natural gas field discovered in the Egyptian EEZ does not ultimately neighbor with the Cypriot blocks 10 and 11. They have already informed the Energy service of the competent ministry for this opinion, although the evaluation of data is ongoing and the possibility of a pleasant surprise cannot be excluded, particularly when to the existing data, more will be added from the confirmatory drilling scheduled by the Italian Eni in Zohr, for January 2016.
The Energy Minister Yiorgos Lakkotrypis who met with the general secretary of the central committee of AKEL Andros Kyprianou and discussed about issues concerning the identification (location) and exploitation of natural gas,
The Leviathan deposit, which was discovered in 2010 in the territorial waters of israel and was up until recently the largest in the Mediterranean, has the size of 17 trillion cubic meters of gas and according to eni, the output from the exploitation of Zohr, is expected to be 37% larger than that of the Leviathan deposit.
The Energy Minister of Cyprus, Yiorgos Lakkotrypis The CEO of Eni, Claudio Descalzi The former Director of the Department of Energy of Cyprus Solon Kassinis
31
emphasizing on the exploitation of the Aphrodite deposit and the completion of researches for a possible extension of Zohr in block 11, was asked regarding the issue and replied, that it is a matter of short time for more information on a possible extension of the Zohr to be available.
According to sources published in the Cypriot press, Total is also studying the same issue, who is interested as much as the Cypriot government, since it still holds the exploitation rights for block 11. All indications show that the last thing the French would wish for would be to conclusively leave block 11 (they will shortly be invited to clarify their position) and then prove for it to be “gold-bearing”. As it is known, they have already left block 10, for which other foreign companies seem to be more interested in, due to its proximity to the Zohr.
Immediately after the announcement of the discovery of the deposit, the Energy Minister of Cyprus Yiorgos Lakkotrypis contacted his Egyptian counterpart by telephone, which he congratulated and also discussed with him any influencing of the in principle agreements and scheduling for the “Aphrodite” block. As he stated, Ismail Sherif himself reassured him that the programming is progressing normally. The two ministers agreed to meet soon for a detailed examination of the developments.
Mr. Lakkotrypis speaking at RIK stated:
“If the great discovery is confirmed then geological, commercial and geopolitical implications would arise. This occurred very close to the Cyprus-Egypt sea border and more specifically at block 11. Each company uses its own geological model. Since 2005 another company was attempting to locate deposits but eventually withdrew from the area in question. Today we see that we are dealing with different data”.
Regarding the question whether this is affecting the exploitation of the “Aphrodite” deposit, Mr. Lakkotrypis stressed that the procedures are progressing normally. “We moving on with what we have announced”, he said.
The President of Cyprus Nicos Anastasiades speaking recently at the annual meeting of the American-Jewish Committee in Chicago, said that the discovery of the deposit strengthens the prospects for further synergies in the region, stressing that energy can be an accelerator for cooperation and stability in an unstable region.
The announcement by part of Eni, caused comments, statements and announcements by part of the political parties in Cyprus.
The Democratic Party (ΔΗΚΟ) believes that the discovery radically changes the situation and the scene in the energy field and calls on the government to proceed immediately with a joint-exploitation agreement with Israel and signing gas sale contracts to Egypt
within the coming months, as well as the return of ENI in the Cypriot EEZ.
The Citizens’ Alliance stressed that the picture changes radically and asked the National Council to convene and decide upon alternative energy policies, taking the new data into account.
The Ecologists consider that the discovery radically changes the geopolitical equilibrium. They accuse the Cypriot government of finding pretexts to delay or freeze the works on the development of natural resources of the Cypriot EEZ.
The European Party considers from its perspective that new developments can consolidate and strengthen the regional energy front of Cyprus, Greece and Egypt.
In his own statements, the former Director of the Department of Energy of Cyprus Solon Kassinis, expressed his confidence that huge reserves shall be found in the area nearby and that it is certain that there are more reserves in the Cypriot EEZ.
Lastly, the Mediterranean Institute of Hydrocarbons Technology issued a statement calling for the immediate completion of the planning for the construction of the pipeline to Egypt and the rapid conclusion of the agreements on the exploitation of natural gas from “Aphrodite”.
32
10Romania says “no” to Russia and “yes” to the WestRomania will be able to use only domestic gas next year, so the imports from Russia can be discontinued. one of the most controversial issues in the energy policy of the country is resolved. at the same time, a new gas pipeline project is born to link Bulgaria, Romania and hungary, with help from the united states.
Geopolitics of energyEmilia Damian
The import of gas from Russia to Romania this year may amount to only 3% of the country’s total consumption, so it is possible that next year Romania may rely entirely on domestic production and give up imports, the President of the National Regulatory Authority for Energy, Nicolae Havrilet, announced. Havrilet estimated that this year gas imports from Russia will be needed only if we get a cold winter.
“Since April, Romania has not imported anything. And now, at this moment, imports are zero. This year, we expect imports at approximately 3%, but we import gas for balancing. For example, if we have a longer period of frost, the gas deposits cannot be removed under normal pressure. If domestic production next year will cover the entire consumption, then we will not import”, Havrilet said.
Lower consumptionIn 2008, Romania imported 25% of its natural gas consumption. The announcement of the President of the National Energy Regulatory Authority (ANRE) comes as businessman Ioan Nicolae, owner of Interagro group,
announced it would close down production in all six factories it owns. InterAgro fertilizer producer was among the largest consumers of natural gas in Romania, with approximately 2 billion cubic meters per year, that is the cumulative consumption of the entire population in the country - about 2.5 billion cubic meters annually.
“For 2015 we expect the total national consumption similar to or even less than 11 billion cubic meters of gas. The reason is that six factories belonging to InterAgro have closed since April. They consume about 2 billion cubic meters of gas per year”, Havrilet pointed out.
He added that Romania could have extra reserves of 2.5 billion cubic meters at the end of the storage period.
The price of gas imported from Russia reached 380 dollars per thousand cubic meters. While the Romanian domestic gas price is 130 dollars per thousand cubic meters.
The largest question is whether the bill for the final gas consumers will be lower due to using only domestic gas or if
33
prices will not be modified because of the liberalisation process.
Increasing the price of gas for the population, required by the IMF and the European Commission, was delayed by the Government, which wants full liberalization of prices to take place until 2021.
monopoly on pipelinesMeanwhile, Gazprom will be forced to allow other companies to have access to gas transit pipelines on the Romanian territory, starting from 31 December 2015.
This comes after a convention signed in 1996 between the Government of Romania and the Government of the Russian Federation on transit and Russian gas deliveries in Romania will go out of force on 31 December 2015, according to an order of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs published in the Official Gazette. Expiration of the Convention will have an effect: Romania will be entitled to resell the gas coming from Russia.
This was a convention that has raised
many problems because Romania has provisions contrary to Community law, and that is why in 2012 Romania was sued by the European Commission at the European Court of Justice.
Subsequently, after discussions with representatives of the Romanian Government, the European Commission decided to postpone the European Court of Justice.
eu regulationsBesides the 1996 Convention, there is another one signed with Russia (then USSR) in 1986. According to the order of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, this will expire too, but a year later, on December 31, 2016. The 1986 Convention covers all transit gas in Romania that was concluded with the USSR, to Romania and Turkey, Greece and other countries. Thus, the expiration of the first Convention is the first step in eliminating the Russian monopoly over the use of transit pipelines.
Romania was a step close to be sanctioned by the EC because agreements with Russia. Romania was
accused of violating EU provisions for these two conventions signed many years ago, because the conventions with Russia blocked third party access to gas pipelines transiting Romanian territory. On the Romanian territory, the pipelines belong to Transgaz, the national transporter, but are used only by Gazprom.
new pipelineThe U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) awarded a $956,000 grant to support Transgaz S.A.’s Pipeline Expansion Project. The grant funds a feasibility study to improve and confirm the technical design and economic and financial specifications for constructing the Romanian section of the Bulgaria-Romania-Hungary, US Embassy in Bucharest informs.
The grant was signed in October at the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest by U.S. Ambassador to Romania Hans Klemm and Transgaz S.A. Director General Petru Ion Vaduva. Also present at the grant signing were the Minister of Economy, Mihai Tudose; the Minister of Energy, Andrei Dominic Gerea;
34
Ambassador Mihnea Constantinescu, Special Representative for Energy Security; and U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission Dean Thompson.
“The suggested upgrades to the Romanian National Transmission Network, evaluated by this study, will facilitate increased bilateral trade and support energy security throughout the region,” said Ambassador Klemm.
interconnection with neighbours“Transgaz believes that this study will be instrumental in providing comfort to all market participants that the integration of the Romanian National Network with neighbouring countries will soon become a reality”, said Petru Vaduva, the general director of Transgaz.
“This integration will establish the much-needed connection between Southern
and Central Europe, while ensuring the security of supply and transparency of pricing in the region”, he added.
The projects are a critical piece necessary to increase pipeline capacity and upgrade the gas transmission network’s operating pressure, and ultimately energy security in the region.
Through the modernization and construction of the new pipelines, Transgaz intends to distribute anticipated new gas resources from the Black Sea, as well as conduct bi-directional gas trade with neighbouring countries.
offshore resourcesThis grant builds on a USTDA-funded reverse trade mission in 2013 that hosted 17 Romanian business leaders and government officials in the United States. The visit helped demonstrate advanced U.S. upstream oil and gas production technologies, practices, and regulations meant to help Romanian stakeholders plan for the development of offshore resources along the Black Sea.
Romania’s national gas transport company Transgaz Medias has a EUR 1.5 billion investment plan by 2023 that mainly focuses on transporting the natural gas that OMV Petrom and Exxon will extract from the Black Sea to Austria.
the priorities of transgaz
Romania’s national gas transport company Transgaz Medias has a EUR 1.5 billion investment plan by 2023 that mainly focuses on transporting the natural gas the OMV Petrom and Exxon will extract from the Black Sea to Austria.
The company’s priorities are to develop a gas transport pipeline from Romania’s southern border with Bulgaria to the western border with Hungary, with an estimated length of 550-kilometre. The total investment is some EUR 560 million and should be ready by April 2019. This project, which is called the South Danubian corridor, aims to connect Bulgaria’s gas transport system with those of Romania, Hungary and Austria.
The second part of this project is to connect the Black Sea shore with this regional corridor via a new 285-kilometre pipeline, which will cost some EUR 262 million.
This investment should also be finalized in April 2019.
Transgaz’ second project is a gas corridor through central Romania, which should take over the extra gas from the Black Sea. This second project should also connect to the Republic of Moldova. The total investments in this project are estimated at some EUR 654 million.
Transgaz also plans to attract EU funds for some of the investments. The company increased its turnover by 9% last year, to EUR 364 million. The net profit surged by 52%, to EUR 116 million. Transgaz will distribute dividends worth EUR 58 million to its shareholders.
The state holds 58.5% of Transgaz’s shares with the remaining 41.5% traded on the Bucharest Stock Exchange. The company has a market capitalization of EUR 732 million.
35
11PRINCIPLES OF A
FLEXIBLE PETROLEUM FISCAL FRAMEWORK
“There are a few areas of economic policymaking in which the returns to good decisions are so high – and the punishment of bad decisions so cruel – as the management of natural resource wealth,” noted Philip Daniel, a reputed expert of the IMF. One of the most important tools in the management of natural resources is the fiscal regime of petroleum exploration and production.
Oil & GasRadu Dudαu*
Petroleum fiscal policy is a key instrument through which producing countries aim at getting as large a share of the economic rent generated by oil and gas extraction as possible. Governments also promote socio-economic objectives: jobs, technology transfer, infrastructure projects, macroeconomic stability by means of steady budgetary incomes etc. Under concession regimes, title holders seek to obtain profits that are proportional with the degree of risk they take when investing in exploration and production. In order to achieve such objectives on the long term, it is paramount to have a transparent, predictable and internationally competitive regulation environment.
However, fiscal stability seems to be harder and harder to achieve, as in the past 15 years international oil markets have become unprecedentedly volatile. Between 2002 and 2008 the Brent barrel price rose fivefold to the historical level of $147, only to fall to $46 within the following three months; then, it went up again to reach $127 at the beginning of 2011, where it stayed relatively stable
until the summer of 2014; the price then collapsed 60% from $114 till the year’s end, hovering under the $50 dollar level at present.
The volatility of international oil quotations has challenged the stability of petroleum fiscal frameworks. Thus, starting in the mid-2000s, several producing countries showed their frustration over the fact that fiscal terms failed to generate the expected economic rent. Such governments wanted to renegotiate the fiscal terms in their favor. By the same token, cheap oil pushes companies to ask for milder fiscal treatment, in order to be able to pursue their investment plans. Given that the economic cycle of petroleum projects is about 30 years on average, it is quite a challenge for a petroleum fiscal framework to remain stable for so long, under high oil markets’ volatility.
At the beginning of 2015, the Romanian Government started a process of revising the fiscal regime for the oil and gas upstream activities. This happened under public pressure stemming from the misconception that the old royalties’
36
framework expired at the end of 2014. The confusion, also fueled by a mix opportunism and ignorance in politics and mass media, was between the expiry of the 10-year stabilization clause in the Petrom S.A.’s 2004 privatization contract and the presumed duration of the “old” royalties’ framework.
Nevertheless, a stabilization clause is a mere contractual provision practiced worldwide which guarantees the parties – investors and state alike – that the fiscal regulations in place at the time of contract conclusion stay unchanged (or do not impose higher rates of tax) during the clause’s period of validity. Typically, such stabilization clauses include recourse to arbitration, to determine adequate compensation and adaptation measures. Now, the stabilization clause in the Petrom S.A. privatization agreement expired on 31 December 2014. However, the clause itself has not hindered the government from initiating changes of the petroleum fiscal regulations, if it so wanted, at any time before that deadline or after that, as long as these would not have applied retroactively. In other words, any such
fiscal changes could only concern new petroleum agreements.
The Romanian Government’s new approach to the oil and gas fiscal regime has all the features of a rigid framework, with meager chances of remaining stable on the long term. Other than minor changes in the royalties rates (which at the moment vary between 3.5 and 13.5% for oil, and 3.5 and 13% for natural gas, depending on the volume of quarterly production) and some useful distinctions between operations types (onshore, offshore, deep-water offshore etc.), a problematic “supplementary profit tax” is introduced.
The exact rate of this new profit tax is yet undisclosed, but it is sure to raise the fiscal burden on oil companies investing in Romania way above the level of European countries comparable in terms of geology and political risk. Moreover, it is as yet unclear if the supplementary profit tax is to apply to existing concessions as well. If so, it would blatantly violate the principle that regulations are not to apply retroactively. Besides, it would amount to double profit
taxation, imposed selectively and for undetermined time to a single industry. On the other hand, if the tax will not apply to existing concessions, but only to new ones, then the new tax rate will be hard for investors interested in a new oil and gas E&P licenses to accept.
Certainly, it is the state’s sovereign right to tax the exploitation of its natural resources as it sees fit. However, assuming that the Romanian state’s strategic objective is to have a robust oil and gas industry and support the development of new hydrocarbons sources, its long-term interest can only be to incentive oil companies to invest in exploration and development. A competent government, aware of the consequences of its decisions, ought to realize that drastically toughening the fiscal terms (following a logic that, perhaps, could have been accepted a decade ago, when oil prices were at a record high and growing, but not nowadays, when the price has plunged by 60%) might bring some short term gains, yet is sure to cause considerably higher losses on the long-term: mothballed investments, lower revenues for the state, lost jobs,
37
diminished or cancelled multiplier effects etc. Incentivizing investments also extends the lifespan of oil projects, and makes operations more counter-cyclic, because constant investment flows will put in place spare capacity, which is the best means to mitigate the effects of price volatility.
But how should a flexible and stable fiscal framework for upstream O&G look like? While there is no ideal prototype, suitable regardless of particular geological, economic and political conditions, such a framework needs to meet some basic requirements: • It must be progressive, that is correlate the economic rent the government receives with the level of capital investments made by the companies. Taxes such as the special construction tax, a.k.a. the “pillar tax,” are deeply regressive and unpredictable. Thus they dramatically reduce operators’ motivation to invest. • It must incorporate the oil price as a variable, sliding in a large value span from very low ($10-15 a barrel) to very high ($150 or more), so that the economic rent is always tied to the oil price. Hence, at high oil prices the state should receive a larger share of profits, while at low prices fiscal demands should not only be downsized, but also accompanied by investment incentives, such as “negative royalties” or fiscal credits. • It must stay neutral as new distinctions are introduced, making place for new technologies and types of activities in newly discovered reserves, whose viable development requires
special fiscal conditions.
Moreover, the fiscal framework ought to include as few taxes as possible that are independent of the projects’ profitability, as well as an adequate system of deductions through which the operator manages its investment risk. Exploration spending should be deductible, as it makes up one of the most significant risks confronting oil and gas projects. Finally, a petroleum fiscal framework cannot be drafted without tying its complexity to the administrative and institutional capacity to regulate, monitor, and audit. Consequently such a fiscal framework has to be as straightforward as possible, so that it can be efficiently managed by existing institutional bodies.
In Romania, the calendar for introducing the framework is still vague. It is unknown if (and when) the draft that has been publicly discussed conceptually will enter parliamentary debates. In any event, is unlikely that it can offer a lasting solution, given its inadequacy to the present trends of the global oil industry. All things considered, it may be worthwhile considering drafting a new petroleum fiscal framework altogether – a modern, flexible, stable one, able to offer more than a merely short-term remedy.
Republished from EPG Romanian Energy Market Monitor - September 2015
* Radu Dudau is director of Energy Policy Group (EPG), Bucharest
A competent government, aware of the consequences of its decisions, ought to realize that to drastically toughen the fiscal terms might bring some short term gains, yet is sure to cause considerably higher losses on the long-term: mothballed investments, lower revenues for the state, lost jobs, diminished or cancelled multiplier effects etc.
38
12The “riddle” of mainTaining a public ppca “race” for the new government and the competent minister, panos Skourletis in order to present to the lenders with “equivalents” to ensure the public character of the ppc and, by extension, of the strategic energy sector. The timeframe is extremely tight, due to the upcoming first assessment of the Third memorandum.
overviewPenelope Mitroulia
The timeframe available for the Minister of Environment and Energy, Panos Skourletis to draw up an alternative plan of reforms in the energy sector, aiming mainly at the preservation of the public character of the PPC, as he says at every opportunity is extremely narrow.
The political context within which both Mr. Skourletis, and the other ministers handling the prerequisites of the third memorandum seek to move in, was set by the Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras during the first meeting of the new cabinet. “It is important that we don’t lose an inch from the winning grounds of negotiation and not return to dead-end extreme neoliberal policies” stated Mr. Tsipras, referring to labor issues, the regulation of ‘red’ loans, the operation of the new State Property Fund and ensuring the public character of the PPC and energy networks.
Thus Mr. Skourletis is called upon, within a minimum time period, to agree with the lenders and to implement the alternative reform program of the energy sector on the following critical issues: • The implementation of the temporary
and permanent remuneration mechanism of power plants capacity. This measure concerns both the PPC and private power producers from natural gas units.
• The amendment of the rules of the electricity market so that the production plants cannot be forced to operate below their variable costs.
• The establishment of rules for offsetting debts between the PPC and market operators.
• The commencement of the implementation of the reform regarding the “opening” of the natural gas retail market.
• The entry into force of the electricity Interruption contracts for industries so that they can have cheaper electricity.
• The revision of the PPC’s electricity tariffs based on the cost, by replacing the 20% discount that was granted to industries last year and this year.
• The commencement of discussions with the European Commission for the PPC’s auctions of electric power deriving
39
from lignite and water, following the French NOME model, so that the share of state-owned company in the market is immediately reduced by 25%, and below 50% in 2020.
Beyond this Mr. Skourletis is called upon to agree with the lenders on the alternative privatization plan of the IPTO. The July agreement on this issue is clear: privatization or an alternative equivalent compared to the results in competition. If there is no such equivalent plan, the government is obliged to commence the privatization process in October.
The alternative equivalent presented by the government in the negotiations with view to closing the August agreement for the IPTO, provides for the continuance of the fixed PPC charges and secession activities related to competition, and specifically of the Agios Stephanos Dispatch Centre, which will be transferred to the current Hellenic Electricity Market Operator (ΛΑΓΗΕ) which is 100% State owned and that will develop into the Transmission System Operator.
The new IPTO that will emerge will be able to dispose 49% of its shares to third parties, while the current IPTO will remain a 100% subsidiary of the PPC competent of the maintenance and development of the network, as well as the projects construction. Thus, the necessary investments will be decided upon by the Hellenic Electricity Market Operator and implemented by the PPC’s subsidiary. This pattern
existed in the past when the PPC was a vertically integrated undertaking and the respective projects were carried out by the Transport Directorate which was subsequently seceded in order to form the independent company of IPTO foreseen by the European legislation.
As regards the NOME law (Law on the New Organization of Electricity Markets), that is the French model of supply through tenders of lignite and hydroelectric power in order to restrict the PPC’s share by 25% by 2018 and by 50% by 2020, which the government will try to achieve will be for that to occur on terms that will not lead to a depreciation of the PPC. This, as officially stated by the CEO of the PPC, Manolis Panagiotakis means that it should at least cover the full cost of producing electricity as this is imprinted in its financial statements and not to occur by an uncontrolled transfer of its most attractive customers to the PPC’s competitors.
Meanwhile since the caretaker government working groups were appointed to examine the pending issues within the emergency energy prerequisites of the third memorandum.
Thus, four days before the September elections, the caretaker minister Professor John Golias, signed a decision forming committees that were invited to promote all of the MoU issues concerning the liberalization of energy markets, and also prepare the discussions may have to be held with the services of the European Commission. These committees are the following: • Temporary and Permanent Payment System Capacity. (Proof of Capacity Availability). • Power stations below the variable production costs. • For the implementation of the gas market reform. Remove local monopolies of Gas Supply Companies. • Application of interruptible contracts. • Review invoices based on the marginal cost of production. • Re-engineering of the NOME system. • Privatization of the electric energy transmission company IPTO or the drawing up of an equivalent alternative development plan.
mr. Skourletis is called upon, within a minimum time period, to agree with the lenders and to implement the alternative reform program of the energy sector
The Minister of Environment and Energy, Panos Skourletis
40
There are probably very few who know that the first MOL station opened in Salonta, Bihor County, in 1995. Back then, Romania was very different to what we now see. At the time, the country was not a member of NATO or the EU, the economy was still not restructured, the inflation rate after 1990 sometimes exceeding 200%, the aging auto fleet and infrastructure lagging behind other European countries. The MOL Group’s decision to invest in Romania was made in 1993 when the company chose its strategic path to expand in the region.
As part of the MOL Group, an integrated, independent, international oil and gas company with operations in more than 40 countries, MOL Romania not only
developed its fuel distribution but also created complex solutions around fuel cards and constantly extended its portfolio, to include high quality products like lubricants, bitumen and petro-chemicals.
20 years after opening its first station, MOL Romania now operates a network of 200 service stations and will add 12 more this year. The company has pursued a medium to long-term growth strategy which includes organic growth as well as acquisitions, the latest of which was completed in early 2015.
As it grew side-by-side with the Romanian economy and contributed to its growth, the company invested over EUR 200 million in Romania and paid more than EUR 1.8 billion in taxes to the state budget. Over 2.100 people work in the Romanian MOL service stations and am additional 200 people are employees of MOL Romania. Furthermore, the company is operating two fuel terminals, one in Tileagd Bihor County and another in Giurgiu with access to river transport on the Danube River.
MOL Romania was also a pioneer
in several areas like fuel cards for companies or the “MultiBonus” loyalty platform for individual customers. In 2002, when it only had 39 stations, MOL Romania began to develop the fuel card system, similar to bank credit cards, which were still a novelty at the time in Romania. The first cards were MOL GOLD, fit for international use, and MOL Silver for the national network. Currently, the MOL fuel cards allow real-time monitoring of transactions through the Virtual Card Center and enable access to a wide range of additional services (i.e. refueling outside the country, VAT recovery, EU toll payments, GPS solutions, roadside assistance, free mobile app, toll planner). The “MultiBonus” is now carried by more than 1 million Romanians who receive bonus points on every purchase from a MOL service station. The bonus points can later be converted into products and services available at MOL stations.
MOL Romania strongly believes in the Romanian market as well as in its long-term potential, which is why it implemented here the latest concept and trends in European retail. The most
13MOL – 20 successfuL years in rOMania... and cOuntingas an old saying goes, every journey starts with the first step. MOL romania made its first steps 20 years ago. now, the MOL service stations are well-known by romanian and foreign drivers, for their positioning on all major routes and in cities throughout the country.
Oil & gas
41
recent one, introduced in 5 stations in Romania and a further 23 in MOL Group stations in the region, is the Fresh Corner, a new shop concept for service stations. Fresh Corner focuses on fresh food, daily groceries and a wide array of freshly prepared coffee types. It is the first time that a service station network offers fresh dairy, cold cuts, fresh fruit and other daily groceries and competitive prices.
The company has created several programs for the benefit of local communities: the “Green Belt”, launched 10 years ago to create green areas in cities and promote natural areas, the “Can I help?” to support young talented artists and sportspeople, the “MOL for Child Healing” – to support NGOs which carry out emotional or art-therapy programs for children suffering from chronic illness or
in recovery, the “Mentor” to acknowledge the merits of 10 teachers or trainers, nominated by their students or their parents, and selected by a competent jury.
The first was made 20 years ago, and MOL Romania’s journey continues, with companions including its employees, partners, customers and the communities which it helps grow.
MOL Fresh Corner
42
14Romanian “invasion” in the eneRgy sectoR of moldova
geopolitics of energyAda Gavrilescu
the Romanian state-owned energy companies want to buy strategic energy assets in the Republic of moldova.
43
The Romanian energy transporter Transelectrica and gas transporter Transgaz want to buy stakes in energy companies in the Republic of Moldova that will be privatized. The two companies’ representatives handed their intention letters to Moldovan officials during a joint meeting of the Romanian and Moldovan governments that took place in September at Neptun, in South-Eastern Romania.
“The Minister of Economy, Mr Tudose, presented letters of intent on the part of the Romanian companies Transelectrica and Transgaz on their involvement in the privatization and development of Moldova. Romanian companies that have gone through restructuring processes of modernization, were listed on the stock exchange and they have the necessary financial resources - because, as you know, the money from their listing was not taken away to the budget, but left with the companies in question - to carry out the investment program in Moldova”, Ponta said in a joint press conference with his Moldovan counterpart Valeriu Strelet.
the vicious circleIn turn, Strelet said that “the interest of Romanian companies to participate in the development of the energy system in Moldova will allow this country out of the vicious circle of dependence on a single source of supply of energy resources”.
Prime Minister Victor Ponta announced this spring that the two companies, as
well as the gas producer Romgaz had funds for investments, so they could buy stakes in energy companies in Moldova. In February, electricity distributor Electrica also said that it was interested in entering the energy distribution market in Moldova through an acquisition.
In the last two years, the Government of the Republic of Moldova has included on the privatization list the electricity distribution companies RED Nord and RED Nord-Vest. It plans to sell a 75% stake in each. The procedure was,
however, cancelled in spring of 2014, after only one Russian bidder remained in the race.
money for interconnectorsAs regards Transelectrica, the company needs to invest over EUR 1 billion in the grid, to enhance interconnections, remove backlogs and overhaul aging assets, said Carmen Neagu, member in the supervisory board of the grid operator.
Neagu said the Transelectrica plans to strengthen the Western inter-connection with Serbia, as well as the lines with neighbouring Republic of Moldova. The grid operator is also planning an inter-connection with Turkey. This would be carried out through an underground cable crossing the Black Sea.
She added that power transformation units that were in operation for more than 30 years need to be replaced. The company also has to upgrade the management system of the national energy dispatch.
“Romania is on the EU border, at the interconnection of continental Europe with the energy system area of the former Soviet Union, between various congestion areas in Europe (…) All these challenges require investments of over EUR 1 billion solely in the grid. In fact, they represent only the important investment areas”, said Neagu.
“the minister of economy, mr tudose, presented letters of intent on the part of the Romanian companies transelectrica, transgaz on their involvement in the privatization and development of moldova” – victor Ponta, the Prime-minister of Romania
Victor Ponta Valeriu Strelet Carmen Neagu
44
15Hard times for omV Petrom due to low oil Pricesthe profits of omV Petrom, the largest oil and gas producer in se europe, have collapsed during the first six months of 2015 by almost 25 percent, due to lower oil prices. as a result, the investments will also be lowered by 30 percent.
oil & GasAda Gavrilescu
OMV Petrom, the largest oil and gas producer in SE Europe and the largest Romanian company, has ended the first half of 2015 with a net profit of RON 1.04 billion (EUR 234 million), down by 25% year-on-year. In the first half of 2014, the company had a net profit of RON 1.38 billion. Its sales also dropped by 18% during this period, compared to the first six months of 2014, to RON 8.81 billion (EUR 1.98 billion), mainly due to lower oil prices, according to the company’s financial report. The EBIT group’s amounted to RON 1.28 billion (EUR 288), 39% lower than the result posted in the first half of the previous year.
In the exploration and production sector, the company’s main profit centre has been strongly affected by the decrease of about 50% of the oil barrel price, Petrom representatives say. The cheap barrel has resulted in a decrease in Petrom’s investment budget, which will be 30% lower than 2014.
Mariana Gheorghe, CEO of OMV Petrom S.A. said: “On the back of previous investments, Romanian hydrocarbon production advanced in
Q1/15 by approx. 2% yoy, on higher contribution from well workovers and field (re)developments. Nevertheless, the Upstream result was affected by the sharp drop in oil prices, which was only partly compensated by positive FX effects and slightly higher sales volumes. In exploration, together with ExxonMobil, we finalized the drilling at two deepwater wells and the rig has since been moved to a new drilling location in the Neptun deep block. In Downstream Oil, refining contribution was strong, triggered by solid refining margins and improved operational performance, while in marketing, retail sales volumes advanced by 4% yoy”.
Predictable framework”In response to the low crude price environment, we scaled back our 2015 group investments by approx. 30% yoy and continued to optimize our cost structure, measures which are expected to protect our free cash flow position. Nevertheless, these initiatives will impact our hydrocarbon production in the future. In the next months, we expect public consultations on the fiscal and regulatory environment to continue, as announced
45
by the authorities, and we aim for a stable, predictable and investment-friendly framework, which is a key precondition for future investments.” Mariana Gheorghe added.
A company release informs that the group production costs (OPEX) in USD/boe were 16% lower than in Q1/14, mainly due to favourable FX effects. In Romania, production costs decreased by 17% in USD/boe, while, in RON terms, they were 1% below the Q1/14 level reflecting the lower tax on constructions and materials expenses, as well as higher production available for sale.
Exploration expenditures increased to RON 365 mn (Q1/14: RON 99 mn), mainly in relation to the ongoing drilling in the Neptun Deep block together with the operator ExxonMobil. Exploration expenses amounted to RON 66 mn in Q1/15, mostly in relation with the write-off of one onshore well. In March the drilling at Pelican South-1 well was completed and a new exploration well was spudded. Group daily hydrocarbon production was 183.5 kboe/d (of which 174.3 kboe/d in Romania) and total production stood at 16.5 mn boe, reflecting higher production in Romania and lower production in Kazakhstan.
Production up, costs downIn Romania, the total oil and gas
production stood at 15.7 mn boe, 2% above the Q1/14 level (15.4 mn boe). Domestic crude oil production was 6.9 mn bbl, 2% below the Q1/14 level (7.0 mn bbl) due to natural decline and planned workovers at key wells. Domestic gas production advanced by 4% to 8.8 mn boe, mostly supported by new wells put on stream in the Bustuchin field, as well as bean-up on Totea field. In Q1/15, we finalized the drilling of 37 new wells and sidetracks, compared to 18 new wells performed in the same quarter last year.
In Q1/15, the average Urals crude price decreased to USD 52.89/bbl, 30% lower compared to Q4/14. The average realized crude price decreased by 29% to USD 45.37/bbl. Clean EBIT dropped 67% vs Q4/14 mostly due to lower oil and gas sales, which offset the favourable effects from FX (USD 12% stronger against RON) and lower royalties.
Reported EBIT dropped 55% vs Q4/14, the latter reflecting higher special charges, mainly in relation to the impairment in Kazakhstan triggered by unsuccessful field redevelopment results
“the upstream result was affected by the sharp drop in oil prices, which was only partly compensated by positive fX effects and slightly higher sales volumes” – mariana Gheorghe, ceo of omV Petrom
46
in the TOC fields. Group production costs in USD/boe decreased by 16% compared to Q4/14 level, mainly resulting from favourable FX effects and lower services expenses.
Production costs in Romania decreased by 16% when expressed in USD/boe, and by 6% in RON/boe terms (RON 54.73/boe), reflecting the lower tax on constructions and strict cost management. The Group daily production increased by 1% to 183.5 kboe/d supported by higher
daily volumes in Romania while total production amounted to 16.5 mn boe (Q4/14: 16.7 mn boe).
The Group sales volumes decreased by 1% compared to the Q4/14 level, largely due to lower sales in Kazakhstan, the OMV Petrom release concludes.
“we expect public consultations on the fiscal and regulatory environment to continue, as announced by the authorities, and we aim for a stable, predictable and investment-friendly framework” – mariana Gheorghe, ceo of omV Petrom
on the way to the london stock exchange
OMV Petrom’s shareholders have approved the company’s secondary listing on the London Stock Exchange. The company will issue global depository receipts (GDRs) for its secondary listing, which the group’s Executive Board has the mandate to carry on by end-2016. The group’s shares are trading on the Bucharest Stock Exchange (BVB) with the ticker SNP.
OMV Petrom is the largest listed company in Romania with a market capitalization of EUR 4.37 billion. The company’s shares have lost 25% of their value in the last 12 months, on falling oil prices and lower profits.
The decision to list the company in London was supported by the Austrian group OMV, the company’s majority shareholder, with 51% of its capital, and Romanian investment
fund Fondul Proprietatea, which holds 19% of OMV Petrom’s shares. Fondul Proprietatea also plans to sell a significant part of its stake in OMV Petrom via this listing, as the Romanian capital market still lacks the depth to absorb large share sales, according to the fund’s manager, Franklin Templeton.
Two of Romania’s largest state-owned companies, gas producer Romgaz and electricity distributor Electrica, went public during the last two years via dual listings on the Bucharest Stock Exchange and the London Stock Exchange. Fondul Proprietatea itself went for a secondary listing in London this year, to attract new investors from among the investment funds that don’t find the Romanian market attractive enough to invest in the Bucharest Stock Exchange.
47
16Are we reAdy to
lAunch the BlAck SeA development?
mark Beacom, the ceo of romania’s newest upstream company, Black Sea oil & Gas Srl, provided a presentation at GBc’s 2015 Black Sea offshore conference held at the Intercontinental hotel on october 20 and 21, 2015. on a topic called “Black Sea development – ready to launch?” mr. Beacom first introduced the new company Black Sea oil & Gas Srl (BSoG) and then provided his views on the status of developments in the Black Sea.
oil & Gas
The first Phase of the Midia Gas Development Concept includes 2 fields, Ana plus Doina, with expected reserves of 10Bcm. Two platforms would be required, one at Ana and one at Doina with Doina being connected by an underwater pipeline to Ana and then Ana to shore. The platforms would contain 6 wells and other topside facilities and then a 130km pipeline would be run from the Ana platform to BSOG’s land onshore. The pipeline does not take a direct approach to BSOG’s acquired land on the coast as it must avoid the military restricted zones that are located offshore between BSOG’s land and the Ana platform. A Gas Treatment Plant would be constructed on BSOG’s land and then a connection pipeline to Transgaz’s NTS system would be required.
The first Phase of the MGD whereby all this infrastructure needs to be constructed on the basis of Ana and Doina’s 10Bcm is very challenging economically. The expectation however is that some of the prospects in the vicinity of the platforms may provide for further discoveries which could more readily be tied back to the Ana and
Doina infrastructure on a much more economically favourable basis.
Petrom has made 2 discoveries called Cobalcescu with the latest wells in 2008. There have been no announcement to date on their development. Sterling also made their Ana and Doina discoveries over 7 years ago and an announcement regarding their development has yet to be confirmed. Xom made its Domino discovery in 2013 yet, again, there is no word from Xom regarding any developments. Lukoil recently announced a discovery this month on the Trident block but will clearly need to return to the discovery for further appraisal so it is a long way from development. On this basis there are still no pending announcements of companies moving towards a development in the Black Sea.
Mr. Beacom pointed out that discoveries make the headlines but that dry holes do not. Likely Romania’s Black Sea will witness the same exploration success rate as other hydro carbon bearing areas which is 20-25%. In orther words, for 5 wells drilled 4 will be dry. These wells
48
can cost over $100mm each drill and their cost must be recovered with a successful development.
The other issue he raised was that making a discovery is not the same as having a development. Discoveries simply help address reserves in the ground. Mr. Beacom then turned to what
is actually required to have a company announce that they are ready to launch a development. He explained that the company must first determine whether they have a “Project Sanction” and only then it can confirm a development. A Project Sanction event must have all of the issues addressed below before Project Sanction can be confirmed:
technical – all the reservoir modelling, well density and locations and production profiles must be generated. All the wells must be designed and costed. The platforms must be designed and costed. The offshore processing equipment and offshore and onshore pipelines also must be designed and costed and finally the Gas Treatment plants must be designed and it too must be fully costed.
commercial – Before any Project Sanction the offtake and movement of gas must be confirmed with Transgaz in an agreement and a gas sales agreement must be fully negotiated.
economics – Once the above 2 items have been understood then, and only then, can the company finally run economics to see whether the project is viable.
Financing – Even if the project appears to be economically viable, a financing agreement must be put in place before reaching Project Sanction. Just because a project is economic it may not reach the requirements for financing as the banks will take the worse-case scenario
BSoG profile
The company was formed from Carlyle Group’s acquisition of Sterling Resources Ltd’s Romanian subsidiary Midia Resources SRL. The company’s portfolio is made up of three offshore blocks in the Romanian Black Sea totaling 5.000 km2 gross: XIII Pelican, XV Midia and EX-25 Luceafarul which contain the Ana, Doina, Luceafarul and Eugenia gas discoveries.
The Carlyle Group is a global asset manager with about $194 billion of assets under management across 128 funds and 142 fund of funds vehicles throughout the world.
Carlyle has expertise in many different industries and employs more than 1,650 people in 40 offices across six continents.
BSOG is now a standalone entity with its head office in Bucharest that will be tasked with developing the discoveries in the Black Sea, finding more discoveries on the existing licenses and also seeking other development opportunities in Romania, both onshore and offshore. The company has the mandate to become a significant player in Romania and also will look regionally.
49
for each of the reserves, capital costs, operating costs and gas pricing.
regulatory – Before announcing a Project Sanction the company must have all the environmental and construction permits for both the onshore and offshore facilities, it must have all the land re-zoning approvals and must have NAMR Field Development Plan approval.
If all of the above can be achieved then a Project will finally have reached Project Sanction and the development can then be launched. It was Mr. Beacom’s view that BSOG’s Midia Gas Development will likely be the first to reach this milestone and this, even with working the schedule very hard, will not take place before January 2017. First gas could then be extracted 2 years later in 2019 at the earliest.
Mr. Beacom then addressed the specific challenges that exist in Romania over and above that which would be expected in the North Sea or the Gulf of Mexico.
Firstly TransGaz must provide a firm undertaking to be able to move the gas from the Gas Treatment plant into the NTS and allow for unfettered access to the export Market. On this issue TransGaz has made steady progress although no one has yet been able to move gas out
of the country and there are still no firm agreements in place with TransGaz for a connection to their system.
The company’s gas buyer must be able to obtain full liberalization of its gas. Progress here too has been made but there is still a fixed gas price in Romania and exports are blocked.
There is no regulatory authority for the offshore activity. Good progress has been made to transpose the offshore safety directive but a competent authority has yet to be appointed and Romania has already missed the deadline for its implementation.
Finally, political will must be present to ensure that the fiscal regime remains stable and there is support for Black Sea developments. This is the most worrying issue as there is a continuous discussion regarding arbitrary increases in taxation and this is undermining confidence in the region.
On the basis of all the challenges ahead that the industry faces in developing a project in the Black Sea Mr. Beacom’s answer to “Are we ready to launch?” was simply “Not Yet”.
romania’s Black Sea will witness the same exploration success rate as other hydro carbon bearing areas which is 20-25%. In orther words, for 5 wells drilled 4 will be dry.
50
17Natural Gas Car for iNdividuals aNd busiNessesthe economy, safety and low emissions are the main practical approach to natural gas vehicles which are available from all major automobile industries on the Greek market, for both individuals and businesses, and set new standards in everyday and business trips which are fully harmonized with european requirements and the demands for greater economy.
oil & Gas
CNG is growing rapidly in Greece with a broad refuelling network and vehicles ready to satisfy the needs of a new driver or family and offer luxury editions or vehicles for professional use. The common feature in all cases is the cost savings of over 50% compared to conventional fuels.
In order for businesses to benefit from the use of CNG, DEPA is cooperating with known car authorised dealers in order to offer the corresponding subsidy program to professionals. This initiative provides an opportunity to market businesses to acquire factory-built natural gas vehicles (private vehicles, vans / light duty trucks type), which are available in Greece from the largest automakers such as Mercedes (sprinter, 200), Volskwagen, Skoda and Opel. At the same time, the largest automobile industries are offering CNG versions to meet the growing demand of Greek consumers.
Natural Gas private vehiclesThe known and proven conventional models offered by the automobile industries are also available in CNG
versions thus increasing requirements for greater economy.
from Mercedes benzb-Class 200 Natural Gas drive The B-Class 200 Natural Gas Drive presents a reduction in circulation costs of almost 50% compared to the corresponding petrol models of its range, utilizing the advantages of using natural gas in the best possible way. It can travel approximately 500 km on a single full tank of natural gas, and the engine can be operated with both conventional natural gas and biogas or syngas (a mixture of hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide). (Target price: from 35.900 Euros)
e 200 NGt The E-200 Natural Gas Drive on natural gas, is the new version of the E-class, which consumes 4.3 kg/ 100 km of natural gas, which accounts for less than 4.3 Euros/ 100 km, while it only emits 114 g./ km CO2. By running only on natural gas, the E-Class Natural Gas Drive provides a range of over 400 kilometers, while in combination with gasoline it can travel up to 1600
51
kilometers without needing refueling. The natural gas is stored in three tanks with a total capacity of 121.5 kg. (Target price: from 57.700 Euros)
from skoda- viaMar s.a.sKoda-octavia G-teC The new SKODA Octavia G-TEC is equipped with a 1.4 TSI motor with a performance of 110hp, which runs on natural gas (CNG) and alternatively with unleaded gasoline. Both versions have the Octavia Green Tec standard equipment package that includes advanced cutting edge technologies such as Start-Stop system and Brake energy recovery system during deceleration, while the efficient turbo engine meets the new EU-6 standards.
The performance of the new Octavia G-TEC is impressive as with the exclusive use of CNG its range reaches 410 km with only single tank with the consumption at 3,5 kg/ 100 km. With a CNG price at 0,971 €/ kg cost of use is translated into only 3,4 €/ 100 km (!), while the owner is not burdened with circulation taxes as the emission of CO2 is limited to just 97 g/ km when running on
unleaded petrol its range reaches 920 km and in total, the Octavia G-TEC can travel up to 1.330 km with one fuel supply. (Target price: from 18.700 Euros)
from volkswagen-Kosmocar s.a.vW Golf 1.4 tGi The Golf 1.4 TGI 110 PS Bluemotion has a 110 hp engine performance that stands out for its low cost running on natural gas. The average gas consumption corresponds to about 3.3 Euros/ 100 km. The model is equipped with two additional tanks capable of being filled with 15 kg of compressed gas. A special feature of this vehicle is the presence of semi-automatic dual-clutch gearbox as an option of the car, which contributes to the equipment’s efficiency. (Target price: from 21.990 Euros)
eco up The eco up !, inherits 20 years of Volkswagen’s experience in natural gas engines technology. It is equipped with the new three-cylinder 999ccCNG engine with 68PS performance BlueMotionTechnology. This combination achieves impressive performance levels of range and
economical use. The ecoup! consumes 2,9 kgCNG per 100km and emits only 79gr/ kmCO2. In order for the low cost of use that the ecoup! ensures to be appreciated, it is enough to say that with 0,97 € (current price per kilo of CNG) and an average consumption of 2.9 kilograms of CNG, it only requires 2,8 € per 100 km! The car is supplied with 2 natural gas tanks with a total capacity of 11kg, while alternatively it may run on gasoline as the tank has a capacity of 10lt. Combined, the ecoup!’s range reaches 580km. (Target price: from 12.143 Euros)
volkswagen Passat 1.4 tsi 150 Ps ecofuel The 1.4 TSI 150PS EcoFuel engine guarantees a very good performance for this vehicle, low fuel cost and limited CO2 emissions. It accelerates up to 100 km/ h in 9.8 seconds, has a maximum speed of 214 km/ h and consumes only 4.3 kilograms of natural gas / 100km. (Target price: from 25.540 Euros)
from fiat Group automobiles Hellasfiat 500l Natural Power The natural gas version offers economy
52
in transportation movements and lower CO2 emissions. The model has a 0.9 Twin AirTurbo Natural Power 80 PS engine. The engine power is 80 hp and according to the manufacturer, it requires 3.9 kilograms of gas per 100 km (3.7 Euros/ 100km). One of its key advantages is the spacious rooms and the large luggage space. (Target price: from 19.800 Euros)
fiat Qubo 1.4 70 Ps Natural Power The dual fuel (petrol and gas) version is more economical and is supplied with the 8valve 1.4 liter engine of 70 hp power with CNG and 77 hp running on gasoline. (Target price: from 18.150 Euros)
fiat Panda Natural Power The Fiat Panda Natural Power can travel 1148 km (by combining the gasoline and natural gas tanks), while the fuel economy can go beyond 60% using natural gas compared to gasoline. It features an innovative two-cylinder 0.9 Twin Air Turbo Natural Power engine of 80 hp and only consumes 3.1 kg of natural gas per 100 km. (Target price: from 12.740 Euros)
fiat Punto 1.4 70 Ps Natural Power The Punto natural gas version is equipped with an 8valve 1.4 litre engine with a capacity of 70-hp on CNG and 77 hp on gasoline or LPG which is available with the same engine. The annual movement on gas is significantly lower. (Target price: from 16.250 Euros)
fiat doblo 1.4 t-Jet 120 Ps Natural Power It consumes 4.9 kg of natural gas per 100 km of combined use, corresponding to less than 5 Euros, while when running on gasoline it requires nearly three times the same money. It features a 1.4-liter turbo engine with 120 hp capacity. (Target price: from 14.590 Euros)
from laNCia JeeP Hellas salanciaYpsilon 0.9 twinair CNG The new Ypsilon Eco chic runs either on natural gas (methane) or on gasoline combining the economic and environmental benefits of using CNG with the virtues of a small turbo Twin Air engine. The new engine emits just 86 g CO2 / km and has a low combined fuel consumption: 3,1 kg/ 100 km
when running on natural gas while filling the tank requires less than 12 Euros. The total autonomy using both tanks (CNG and gasoline) can even surpass 1.300 Km, in out of the city routes. In relation to a respective diesel engine, the nitrogen oxide emissions are approximately 90% lower. (Target price: from 16.500 Euros)
from seatseat leon 1.4 tGi 110 Ps Running on natural gas offers a range of 400 km with a consumption of 3,5 kg of CNG per 100 km and 94g CO2 emissions / km. The gasoline engine provides an additional range of 900 km, which combined results in a total range of 1300 km. (Target price: from 18.690 Euros)
from opelopel Zafiratourer 1.6 CNG turbo The Zafira Tourer 1.6 CNG Turbo ecoFLEX produces 110 kW/ 150 hp, with a torque of 210 Nm, while its top speed reaches 200 km/ h. The Opel Zafira Tourer 1.6 CNG Turbo is available in Greece upon request. (Target price: from 26,500 euros)
53
opel Combo 1.4 t-Jet 120 Ps Natural Power The CNG version is fitted with a turbo 1.4 litre engine and capacity of 120 hp and ensures quite satisfactory performance while consuming just 4.9 kg/ 100 km running on natural gas. The Opel Combo 1.4 T-Jet 120 PS Natural Power is available in Greece upon request. (Target price: from 23.360 Euros)
From Αudi Hellasaudi a3 sportback g-tron The Audi A3 g-tron 1.4 TFSI 110 hp is the first car of the German brand with CNG that ensures outstanding economy, since it only consumes 3.3 kg/ 100 km, which corresponds to less than 3 Euros/ 100 km, while its theoretical range reaches 1.300 km (400 with CNG and 900 running on gasoline). The two natural gas tanks with a total capacity of 14.4 kg and weighing only 32 kg are located under the trunk floor. Developing 110 hp and 200 Nm of torque, the Audi A3 Sportback g-tron has a top speed of 190 km/ h, and requires 11 seconds to accelerate from 0-100 km / h. The CO2 emissions are less than 92 to 88 grams per km operating in the natural
gas mode. (Target price: from 28.440 Euros)
Commercial gas vehiclesLight and heavy duty trucks serve passenger needs or products used in professional fleets of large and small businesses throughout Greece as tourism companies, transport companies etc. Let’s look at some models of the Greek market:
from iveCo-Pavlos i. KoNtellis PlCiveCo dailY The Daily IVECO series, which simultaneously combines improved technical and operational characteristics with the 6-speed gearbox, the Start & Stop system, a modern design as well as lower operating costs. Starting from the engines, the new Daily series is available with the 3I four cylinder diesel engine, Euro 5, with a two-stage turbine that delivers a 205 horsepower and 470 Nm torque is extremely high for a van type vehicle. The Euro 5, 2.3 litres engine is also available, with a capacity of 146 hp, 350 Nm of torque and variable geometry turbine. The third
motor, also available in a EEV version (“five and a half”) as for its emissions of pollutants, delivers a capacity of 146 hp and torque of 370 Nm. (Target price: from 40.600 Euros)
from Mercedes benzbeNZ sPriNter NGt The Sprinter range of diesel and petrol engines of Mercedes-Benz, now also includes the dual fuel engine NGT (natural gas – gasoline). This new combined fuel system offers benefits, both ecologically and economically. With the prices of oil and gasoline remaining high and the increasingly stringent environmental requirements for reducing emissions, especially in city centers, the Sprinter NGT is a particularly attractive suggestion. The combination of the gas tank and the fuel tank offer the Sprinter NGT a range of up to 1.000 km. The new Spinter NGT, is available as a closed van, passenger car, chassis and double cabin chassis. (Target price: from 42.100 Euros)
from volkswagen-Kosmocar aevolKsWaGeN CaddY vaN eCofuel With a CNG 2.0l 109 PS natural gas
54
engine, it achieves a lower consumption by almost 30% compared to diesel engines and a large total range and 570km, while for the CaddyMaxi version, the total range reaches 700km. Its basic equipment includes: ESP with BrakeAssist, ABS, ASR, driver airbag, RadioCD “RCD 210” with MP3 and 2 speakers, Climatic air conditioning, power windows, electrically adjustable and heated exterior mirrors, remote control central locking, power steering fully adjustable with a security column, heated rear window with washer, full load compartment divider, asymmetrical rear doors, a right side loading door, daytime running lights. The annual benefit of running on CNG is 575.00 Euros (25.000 km annually, with a gas price of 0,97/ kg, and diesel price of 1,37 lt). (Target price: 24.000 Euros)
from fiat Group automobiles Hellasfiat doblo Cargo The New Doblo Cargo offers a wide range of 7 different engines to cover for every need. Each engine is designed to best meet the needs of professionals, depending on how they need to use the vehicle. The 1.4 T-Jet 120 HP Natural Power – methane/ gasoline – engine
ensures a significant reduction in fuel consumption and costs of use and long range (up to 750 km in the version with five fuel tanks, available upon request, of which 450 km are guaranteed by the use of methane). (Target price: from 22.450 Euros)
from PiaGGioPiaGGio Porter GreeN PoWer The reliability, practicality and economy of use are the strong points in the Porter series. The small size and turning radius - just 3.7 meters - without other “rival” vehicles of the same class, ensure maximum flexibility in movement. Furthermore, the completely flat bed rear of the truck with open side tailgates provide easier access, it has a transporting capacity of up to 850 kg and makes loading and unloading of merchandises faster and simpler. The series offers the new GreenPower version (double fuelling gasoline / methane). (Target price: from 15,400 euros)
Coming soon…New commercial vehicles make their appearance in the European market in 2015 and will be available in Greece upon request.
– volvo fe CNG The new Volvo FE CNG natural gas engine is suitable for local distribution and collection of waste. It operates with a Euro 6 entirely natural gas engine and thanks to the fully automatic transmission it maintains the same productivity and driver behaviour with the conventional FE. The truck has a Euro 69 liter spark technology engine that produces 320 hp and torque of 1356 Nm.
– fiat duCato CNG The Ducato is available with 4 Euro 5+ engines with a capacity of 115, 130, 150, 180 CV. It uses the new generation Multijet engines: an innovative fuelling system with faster becks capable of executing multiple injections in very quick successive order – up to 8 per cycle – optimizing combustion for increased power and reduced emissions to a minimum and lower noise levels. It presents the lowest consumption in its class, and consumes only 5.8 litres/ 100 km with the 130 MultiJet II Euro 5+ (closed type van with short wheelbase standard roof 2.6 tons in the combined cycle).
55
18The Greek
Gas markeT under The Third mou
The Greek natural gas retail market remains monopolistic for the majority of customers. The reform of the situation and the opening of the market have been attempted with the recently introduced statute 4336/2015 for the ratification of the draft contract for the provision of financial aid to Greece from the european stability mechanism, known as the Third memorandum of understanding and voted by the Greek Parliament on 14 august 2015.
Legal insightDr. Yannis Kelemenis, Partner, & Evangelos Tsachas, Senior Associate, Kelemenis & Co.
Under the requirements of EU legislation, large consumption non-household customers should be able to choose their suppliers and enter into contracts even with several suppliers in order to cover their needs in natural gas. Furthermore, according to the EU Third Energy Package, non-discriminatory third party access to the distribution networks must be ensured. This means that the distribution system operators should not be able to exploit their vertical integration towards market users. To this end, network operators must be separated from activities of production and supply (i.e. they must be unbundled legal entities, whereas their organisation and decision making must be independent from enterprises undertaking such activities).
To date the Greek natural gas retail market has been monopolistic for the majority of consumers. Given that it can be considered an “emerging market” even today, the European Commission has granted derogations from the relevant provisions of the First, the Second and the Third Energy Packages. Within this framework, the Greek
Regulatory Authority of Energy (RAE) has granted distribution licenses only to the Public Gas Corporation (DEPA) and the Gas Supply Companies (EPAs) of Attica, of Thessaly and of Thessaloniki. In this respect, the above companies currently undertake the activities of both the distribution networks operation and the natural gas supply. Moreover, their licenses include exclusivity clauses regarding the natural gas supply of non-eligible customers and the development of the network within the geographical areas defined in them. This situation does not protect third parties willing to have access to the distribution systems and to supply eligible customers from potential discriminatory treatment against them.
The reform of the above market situation and the opening of the Greek gas retail market have been attempted with the recently introduced statute 4336/2015 for the ratification of the draft contract for the provision of financial aid to Greece from the European Stability Mechanism, known as the Third Memorandum of Understanding and voted by the Greek Parliament on 14 August 2015.
56
The distributionStatute 4336/2015 introduces crucial changes to the natural gas distribution sector. Particularly, article 80 of statute 4001/2011 has revised, according to which the wide-ranging duties of the distribution licensees have been restrained to the construction and development of the natural gas distribution networks. At the same time, the holders of a distribution license shall be the owners of the networks. Furthermore, a second type of license is introduced, which is called “license for the operation of the distribution networks”. The holders of such licenses are entitled to manage and exploit the networks. Within this framework, the revised article 80 of statute 4001/2011 specifies the relationship between the operators of the distribution networks and the network owners. Network tariffs are intended to include special charges, which the network owners shall pay to the network operators for the management of the system. In line with the provisions of Directive 2009/73/EC, both licensees must be functionally and legally unbundled from the vertically integrated undertaking of natural gas in which they may participate.
Furthermore, article 80A of statute 4336/2015 provides for the establishment of the new Gas Distribution Companies (EDAs), pursuant to the provisions of articles 24, 26 and 31 of Directive 2009/73/EC, which require the financial, functional and legal unbundling of legal persons undertaking the activities of distribution and operation
of the distribution networks. Within this framework the existing bundled EPAs of Attica, Thessaly and Thessaloniki (established by statute 2364/1995) shall keep separate accounts regarding the distribution activity, whereas the functional and legal unbundling of the distribution activity and of the operation of the networks must be completed by 1.1.2017 through the transfer of the distribution sector of each EPA to its subsidiary, i.e. to the EDAs of Attica, Thessaly and Thessaloniki. Alternatively, EPA of Thessaly and EPA of Thessaloniki are entitled to transfer their distribution sectors to a “joint EDA” of Thessaly and Thessaloniki. DEPA is also obligated to conclude the financial, functional and legal unbundling of its distribution sector and transfer it to a new EDA, which shall undertake the relevant activities in the rest of Greece until 1.1.2017 (EDA of the rest of Greece). Given that, except for Attica, Thessaly and Thessaloniki, the development of distribution networks in the rest of Greece is currently very limited, the new legal framework provides for the possibility that only two Gas Distribution Companies, one for the North and one for the South of Greece, are established or just a single EDA for the rest of Greece emerges as a subsidiary of DEPA.
EDAs to be established are obliged to file a petition to the RAE for being granted licenses for the distribution and for the operation of distribution networks within three months from their incorporation. According to these licenses, EDAs will be able to manage the distribution network
within the geographical areas defined in their license, irrespective of whether the distribution network belongs to DEPA or to EDA. It is worth mentioning that the new framework regulates the ownership status both of the already constructed networks and those to be constructed. More specifically, DEPA remains the owner of the already constructed distribution networks all over Greece, while the EDAs will be the owners of the networks that will be constructed by them. The fact that the maintenance, restoration and replacement works for the networks owned by DEPA take place in areas within the geographical areas of the EDAs does not affect the ownership status of the networks. However, the cost of such development and maintenance works conducted by the EDAs shall be deducted from their taxable income and be deemed taxable income of DEPA.
Lastly, article 80C of statute 4001/2011, as introduced by statute 4336/2015, provides that RAE is entitled to grant distribution licenses to third parties for a specific area within the geographical areas defined in the licenses of the EDAs, under the condition that (a) such specific area is not included in EDA’s network development plan or (b) the construction works are not concluded 18 months after the expiration of the relative deadlines set out in the network development plans. Making use of this provision, third parties will be able to develop autonomous micro-grids supplied by CNG vehicles, with the purpose that off-grid communities of household and non-household customers as well as
57
industrial parks have access to networks and natural gas supply.
eligible customers The eligibility of natural gas customers has been expanded by the new law. According to a strict timetable, all natural gas customers, both household and non-household, will have become eligible by 1.1.2018. Article 82 of statute 4001/2011, as amended by statute 4336/2015, provides that EPAs shall be eligible customers for the natural gas quantities servicing eligible customers or exceeding the contractual quantities specified in their supply contracts with DEPA as of 14.8.2015 (namely from the date of the entering into force of statute 4336/2015). From this date electricity generators, consumers of natural gas as fuel for maritime and land transport, and industrial customers who
have consumed more than 2.2 GWh over the last 12 months, are deemed eligible customers. Additionally, all non-household customers having consumed more than 2.2 GWh over the last 12 months shall be eligible customers as of 1.1.2017, whereas, as set out above, all natural gas customers shall be eligible as of 1.1.2018 irrespectively of their consumption volume.
In parallel to the above, the non-eligible customers will be able to become eligible under the condition that the distribution network will not be expanded to their locations within four months from the date they have submitted such a petition in writing to the existing bundled EPA or to the future EDA. In this way, they will be able to be supplied with natural gas even with alternative ways, such as by CNG vehicles. This possibility of off-grid customers to be supplied with natural gas is estimated to promote both the expansion of gas consumption and the future expansion of the networks.
Tariffs and transitional lawArticle 87 of statute 4001/2011, as amended by statute 4336/2015, regulates the tariff rules both of eligible and non-eligible customers. Particularly, RAE is responsible for the issue of regulated tariffs for the non-eligible customers following such a proposal of EPAs and DEPA. In issuing these regulated tariffs RAE is obliged to observe specific rules, i.e. the principle of non-discrimination among categories of non-eligible customers and the prohibition of cross-subsidies.
Furthermore, the tariffs should ensure the recovery of the actual supply cost plus a reasonable profit for EPAs. In exceptional circumstances, and only for a limited period, RAE is entitled to set a maximum profit margin to suppliers.
The new legal framework also includes transitional law for the implementation of the opening of the retail gas market. Specifically, RAE shall undertake the issuing of the tariff regulation and the distribution network operation code following DEPA’s and the existing bundled EPAs’ proposals, in their capacity as current network operators. Following this, RAE shall issue the network tariffs upon DEPA’s and the existing bundled EPAs’ proposal. Until the issue of such regulations, statute 4336/2015 provides that the network users will pay to the network operator (i.e. the bundled EPAs and DEPA) €4/MWh for access to the grid.
Finally, following the functional and the legal unbundling of EPAs and DEPA, the current distribution licenses granted to them shall be replaced by new distribution and operation of distribution network licenses granted to the EDAs. In parallel to this, gas supply licenses shall be granted to EPAs. Until the issuance of the new supply licenses, statute 4336/2015 stipulates that the bundled EPAs are entitled to supply eligible customers as well as customers residing outside the geographical areas defined in their current licenses.
The new legal framework provides for the possibility that only two Gas distribution Companies, one for the north and one for the south of Greece, are established
58
19Bulgaria avoids international arBitrationthe Bulgarian renewable energy sector will avoid yet again and for the fourth time the initiation of a series of international arbitration disputes with the republic of Bulgaria. it showcases the fact that the international investment community is indeed quite tolerant to the host state in cases where it is somewhat demonstrated that the host state and the legal system there is bound to the rule of law and the legal principles accordingly. But when there is the will, there is a way…
legal insightKostadin Sirleshtov
The development of the Bulgarian renewable energy sector has been quite successful in the first years following the enactment of the first Renewable energy act in 2007, which introduced the Feed-In Tariff (“FiT”) as the support mechanism and the related obligatory offtake of all produced electricity and the connection to the grid of all applicants. The second Renewable energy act of 2011 furthermore strengthened the investment climate for renewables in the country with the introduction of the fixed FiT during the entire economic lifetime of the projects. This legislative change coincided with the dramatic decline of the investment costs mainly in the field of photovoltaic (“PV”), which combined with the short deadlines for the construction of these projects, led to a PV energy boom in the first months of 2012. While the Bulgarian Government was re-enforcing in its strategic papers that the national PV target was just 300 MWp installed capacity by 2020, the reality of the matter was that only in the first six months of 2012, Bulgaria saw the construction of 1000 MWp PV capacities, similar to the boom that was earlier seen in Italy and the Czech
Republic, and which subsequently occured in Romania.
Quite naturally, the regulatory challenges followed in the next months of 2012. In July 2012 the end-customer prices were increased with some 13% following mainly as a result of the greatly unsuccessful public spent in huge conventional energy project, which was publicly attributed to the usual suspects being the renewable energy sources. In July – August 2012, the Energy Act and the Renewable Energy Act were amended allowing for immediate changes to the FiTs and this option was immediately put in place for PV projects making the FiT for these absolutely unattractive. The first retroactive changes occured in September 2012 when the State Energy and Water Regulatory Authority (“the Regulator”) with no public consultations or considerations published the so-called “preliminary access to the grid price”, which was essentially a decrease of the FiT with up-to 39% thus shifting this income to the grid companies. Decision C-33/14.09.2012 was abolished by the Supreme
59
Administrative Court of Bulgaria in June 2013 as a result of over 200 appeals of producers. This was a great legal win, but not much of an economic one, as already some 200 million EUR have been streamlined out of the pockets of the renewable producers and with no positive political outcome, as the Government was forced to resign. The hope that the Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court has provided to the legitimate interest of the investors refrained them from launching international arbitration proceedings against Bulgaria (much contrary to the grid operators).
Nevertheless, the attempts for the unconstitutional retroactive changes to the FiT continued and in January 2014, by means of certain amendments to the Renewable energy act passed in December of the previous year, the renewable energy sector saw the Bulgarian Parliament imposing a “solar and wind fee” of 20% over the income of the producers aimed for these funds to enter into the state budget and thus to streamline the funds in public hands helping the substantial financial deficits of the electricity sector. With no direct constitutional court appeal available for the renewable energy producers, they had to pledge to the Bulgarian President who initiated a partial appeal only related to the main problem of the second retroactive package of FiT changes being the “solar and wind fee” of 20% of the income of the producers. By means of a Decision under Constitutional case No 1/2014 the
Bulgarian Constitutional Court ruled that the retroactive fee was unconstitutional and in spite the fact that such a decision had an ex tunc (for the future) effect and the already collected fees were not subject to return, the investment community was relieved for the second time and so Bulgaria didn’t face a series of international arbitration disputes in the way the Czech Republic did with seven cases already started in 2014.
In spite of the above huge legal wins in 2013 and 2014, the renewable energy sector in Bulgaria kept on suffering from the economic effect of these retroactive measures up until March 2014 when the Regulator published a Decision adopting a constant “access to the grid price” and another one – adopting a “compensation mechanism” for the difference between the temporary and final access to the grid price. The Regulator clearly stated that the grid operators who don’t pay back the preliminary access to the grid funds were putting themselves in a position of unjust enrichment and therefore they need to act accordingly. Again, very much in the tradition of the current development of the renewable energy sector in Bulgaria, the regulatory signals were interpreted differently by the various grid operators where one which had the largest number of renewable energy companies connected to its grid decided to go for a mutually beneficial settlement offer immediately after the publication of the decisions of the Regulator, the state-owned company (TSO) was in a process
of unbundling and some of the grid operators were trying to leverage on the unpredictability of the Bulgarian legal system and to rely on the civil court decisions. Nevertheless, the settlement which was reached between the largest number of renewable energy producers and the distributional grid operator that has the largest number of installations connect to its network in April 2014 contributed to the third avoidance of the commencement of the international arbitration proceedings against Bulgaria, which could have been brought forward on the basis of breach of art. 10 (‘fair and equitable treatment of investment’) of the Energy Charter Treaty and the respective Bilateral Investment Treaties that Bulgaria has with the respective countries of the PV investors.
In 2015 Bulgaria saw the establishment of a new Regulator (this time its members are being appointed by the Parliament) and a new, but very much experienced, management of the TSO, both of which contributed to yet the fourth “great escape” from the number of potential international arbitration proceedings against Bulgaria. In a timely and legally sound manner, the largest international and local investors in renewables in Bulgaria carried out a series of consultations with both the newly appointed Regulator and the management of the TSO in order to find out and address the main concerns that these had regarding the potential settlement of the “temporary access to the grid price” dispute. An additional factor to the urgent need for
60
such a discussion was the fact that the prescription period for the filing of the potential claim was coming and there was not much time to waste. Having fulfilled this first step, the investors came with a legal opinion on the next steps and coordinated this paper with both the Regulator and the TSO making sure that in spite the overall good will of the parties, the process will not escalate into any illegal document. Having fulfilled this second step and with the understanding that there is no need for another special decision of the Regulator on the matter, the TSO officially asked the Regulator for a statement regarding the specific case of the company and whether the funds, which have been collected should be paid back to the producers. Very much in line with the practice of the previous Regulator and in line with the Bulgarian legislation and court practice, the Regulator unanimously passed an internal resolution and furthermore confirmed to the TSO that the company’s intention was a legitimate one thus limiting the potential damaged to the state-owned company. The fourth step in the process required some financial concessions on behalf of the large international investors in the Bulgarian renewable energy sector, most of which were happy to agree upon having satisfied themselves with the good will and the positive approach of both the Bulgarian Regulator and the TSO. The settlement agreements are conditional upon the final approval of the Regulator, which shouldn’t be an issue given the support provided so far.
It is quite remarkable however, that over a global settlement of approximately 25 million EUR with the TSO, the Bulgarian renewable energy sector will avoid yet again and for a fourth time the initiation of a series of international arbitration disputes with the Republic of Bulgaria. It showcases the fact that the international investment community is indeed quite tolerant to the host state in cases where it is somewhat demonstrated that the host state and the legal system there is bound to the rule of law and the legal principles accordingly.
Quite naturally, there is also some bad news in the good news of the avoidance of the fourth potential international arbitration round – the expectations of the reminder of the investment community for the involvement of the Regulator and the host government with respect to the cases which still remain unsettled are higher and therefore the fifth critical period of the potential dispute is approaching. As history so far has suggested, if the matter is approached systematically and with good will of all parties involved (when there is a will), there is a way.
it is quite remarkable that over a global settlement of approximately 25 million eur with the tso, the Bulgarian renewable energy sector will avoid yet again and for a fourth time the initiation of a series of international arbitration disputes with the republic of Bulgaria
61
20Renewables and
state aid: beYOnd GOOd intentiOns...
For some time, two dominant concepts have driven the energy policy in south eastern europe (see). From an international perspective, the region is often viewed as a convenient gas corridor, considered as part of several more or less developed projects with different and changing suppliers, capacities, strategic aims and transit countries involved. On the other hand, dreams of national energy independence and/or regional supremacy prompted the introduction of many large-scale and overly ambitious infrastructure projects, with short-term vision, dubious cost-effectiveness and lacklustre realisation. in contrast, renewable energy, which has been somewhat neglected in international and local considerations, offers different insight into the energy potential of the region.
legal insightVeljko Smiljanic *
As carbon resources dwindle, Southeastern Europe boasts plentiful sunshine, favourable wind conditions and abundant hydro potential. This makes a diversified and robust policy on renewables a tempting development choice, backed by many regional success stories. Albania, next to Iceland and Norway, is the third European country to rely almost exclusively on electricity produced from renewable sources. Romania hosts the largest onshore wind power plant in Europe. In 2012, Bulgaria led the world in new solar power capacity per capita, with Slovenia following closely behind in fifth place. Bridging the Danube at Derdap, Serbia and Romania jointly operate Europe’s largest hydroelectric power station, and a wealth of mini-hydro plants are popping up across the region, most notably in FYROM. Generally, around the region, hydro-power has been recognised as an important asset that is steadily growing; wind is increasingly becoming more popular, geothermal energy represents an untapped resource, while the situation with biomass and solar energy varies from country to country. What is unquestionably clear is
that the region offers significant capacity for a robust and sustainable renewable energy policy.
For almost a decade, the region has been integrated into the Energy Community, and harmonisation of national laws with the acquis communautaire on promoting renewable energy has been underway for some time now. This includes local implementation of legally binding targets for the consumption of energy from renewable sources. However, organised electricity marketplaces are still undeveloped throughout the region and governmental support for renewable energy represents a common feature. Support schemes are primarily implemented by awarding long-term power purchase contracts to renewable energy producers with regulated feed-in tariffs or feed-in premiums (typically adapted to cover the cost of generation, with a reasonable rate of return). Generation of electricity from renewables is in this way subsidised by public authorities across the region. Other support mechanisms used may include priority of dispatch (guaranteed off-take of a suppliers’ entire production),
62
exemptions from balancing obligations and, more rarely, preferential terms for the lease of land or upgrade bonuses for facility retro fittings or major overhauls. Renewable energy producers are often categorised legally as privileged generators, shielded from the general marketplace for a certain term following start-up by enabling them to sell electricity to the designated market operator at the feed-in tariff. Usually, the cost of this scheme is, at least to an extent, borne by final consumers, by adding a special fee for the promotion of RES, based on consumption, to their electricity bill.
Other Rules into PlayGood intentions are not always sufficient and governments must take into account the greater picture when promoting renewables. In the case at hand, a sound energy policy has to take into account the rules on fair market competition and restrictions to state aid grants. Since renewables are still, to a large degree, dependant on support mechanisms, any schemes or individual aid disbursed must conform with the applicable legal framework on state aid. National state aid rules in the region are more or less a blueprint of the EU acquis communautaire. In the EU, member states are highly regulated in providing state aid to certain businesses. Certain types of state aid may lead to market fragmentation, distortions in free trade and cross-border competition (including inter-state “trade wars” or protectionism), and can result in cronyism and prevalence of special
interests. Accordingly, the closer the country is to joining the EU, the more important strict and transparent rules on granting aid become.1
Generally, state aid is defined as an advantage in any form conferred on a selective basis to companies by the national public authorities. Such advantages presuppose real or potential public expenditure or a reduction in public income used to afford the beneficiary with a more favourable market position, which distorts or threatens to distort competition. For
a measure to qualify as state aid, it has to be: (i) granted from public resources (e.g. grants, guarantees, subsidies, beneficial loans, tax reliefs, providing goods and services on preferential terms etc.); (ii) offer a selective economic advantage (favouring specific companies, regions or industry sectors2); and (iii) distort or threaten to distort market competition3. As a rule, granting state aid is prohibited, with only a limited number of policy exceptions permitted. Within the EU, the European Commission is in charge of reviewing the compliance of such mechanisms. For countries on the path to accession, individual measures and schemes are relayed to national state aid control authorities, in line with strictly predefined rules. Fortunately, compatible measures may concern the broader interests of energy and environmental policy, and especially may include the promotion of renewable energy. Indeed, the European Commission has, as recently as 2014, adopted specific Guidelines on State Aid for Environmental Protection and Energy, covering the 2014-2020 period (the “Guidelines”).
The rules on the granting of state aid seek to implement a policy that considers the promotion of renewable energy generation to be desirable, provided that state aid measures are designed so as not to threaten market competition. Likewise, local state aid control authorities are unlikely to take an overtly harsh stance against measures seeking to foster renewable energy generation, taking into account
“the fuel in the earth will be exhausted in a thousand or more years, and its mineral wealth, but man will find substitutes for these in the winds, the waves, the sun’s heat, and so forth.” – John burroughs, Under the apple-trees (1916)
63
the importance of renewables for a modern energy and environmental policy. However, establishing national champions is as frowned upon in the renewables sector as in any other sector. In particular, state aid is considered compatible only if it is strictly necessary, proportionate, transparent, without undue negative effects on competition and trade, appropriate for the public interest objective (i.e. generation of energy from renewable sources) and with a well-defined incentive effect4. Any support mechanisms have to be well-considered and structured as objective, transparent and economically justifiable. Ad hoc, discriminatory or discretionary measures, even if nominally implemented for a good cause, can only bring problems in the future.
state aid aspects According to the Guidelines, state aid granted for renewable energy generation can be handed out in two ways: as investment or operating aid. Investment aid relates to a state’s involvement in the construction of new facilities and operating aid relates to individual measures or schemes supporting the generation of electricity for a set term. Different support mechanisms for renewables previously noted across the region imply specific state aid aspects. By definition, feed-in tariffs or feed-in premiums represent governmentally-subsidised prices of a specific good; guaranteed prices are generally above the market price, and feed-in mechanisms therefore relieve the beneficiaries from competitive pressure
and commercial risk. This naturally puts them in a better position compared to competitors. Priority of dispatch ensures guaranteed sales to the renewable energy generator, with a similar basic effect. Although there is an objective reason as to why balancing obligations are generally not suitable for renewable producers (production is much more dependent on weather conditions than for carbon or nuclear plants, making prediction of future generation difficult), relief from this obligation may represent another advantage granted to renewable producers. Most grid users are required to pay for such services, and the public authorities forego this revenue for a specific category of users. Preferential terms for lease of land and upgrade bonuses may also favour renewable energy producers over other producers (or industries) as a form of investment aid.
The Guidelines foresee that by 2030, established renewable energy generators will become grid-competitive, implying that subsidies and exemptions from balancing responsibilities should be phased out in a digressive way. Therefore, transition to a cost-effective delivery is supposed to happen through market-based mechanisms, enabling market integration of renewable sources and direct sales of beneficiaries to the market. The European Commission expects that, as technology advances and facilities spread, with regional networks becoming more interconnected and energy markets more developed, governments should
“…any aid granted by a Member state or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member states, be incompatible with the internal market.” – treaty on the Functioning of the european Union, article 107
64
slowly withdraw from propping up renewable electricity generation.
Under the Guidelines, from 2016, operating aid can be granted: (i) as a premium in addition to the market price, where generators sell their electricity directly in the market; (ii) if the beneficiaries are subject to standard balancing obligations, unless no liquid intra-day markets exist; and (iii) if measures are put into place to ensure that generators have no incentive to generate electricity under negative prices. As of 2017, the European Commission further requires that aid is granted in a competitive bidding process, based on clear, transparent and non-discriminatory criteria (with certain exceptions allowed5). State aid schemes can only be granted for 10 years, with the possibility of subsequent re-evaluation. In addition, state aid can only be granted until a plant has fully depreciated and any investment aid must be deducted from operating aid. Finally, in assessing whether the aid is compatible, the European Commission generally looks at the relationship between the total levelised costs of
producing electricity (including capital expenditure, operational expenditure and financing costs) and current market prices (with a reasonable rate of return6).
It is easy to spot certain difficulties in applying these standards of review to specific jurisdictions in the Balkans: undeveloped energy markets make it hard to estimate current market prices and terms, which affect the calculation of compatible aid. Additionally, since no intra-day markets exist, requiring renewable energy generators to be subject to balancing obligations would not make sense, so applying this precondition will likely require prior development of institutional capacity. As certain kinds of RES are brought online for the first time, greater flexibility could reasonably be expected from local state aid control authorities in countries which are not yet member states. However, taking into account the broader framework, the Energy Community and the necessity for harmonisation, the outlined principles and standards should generally be followed consistently in aid review across the region.
the longest way Round is the nearest way HomeWhat are the consequences of failure to notify state aid? In a worst case scenario, after an ex post review, the grants could be withdrawn and beneficiaries could be forced to return the state aid received. This can even occur many years after the aid was originally granted, in an altered market environment and with potentially disastrous consequences for operations. The outlined rules are consistently applied by the European Commission and local state aid control authorities are likely to adopt a similar approach even in jurisdictions that are not member states. If aid is notified to the European Commission or local state aid control authorities, they may require certain concessions or amendments prior to declaring the granted aid compatible with the legal framework.
After accession, the European Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over review of state aid measures in member states. However, findings by local state aid control authorities may simultaneously be reviewed in substance by the European Commission through
65
different mechanisms. The European Commission may naturally review such decisions post-accession, but it may even raise objections prior to accession and the local authorities generally communicate and consider state aid grants with their EU counterpart7. This means that it is vital to ensure that any aid granted to renewable producers is compliant not only with the local rules, but with the acquis communautaire (and specifically, the Guidelines), even for countries which are not yet member states.
Renewable energy represents a field of great potential for the Balkans, affording countries which have for way too long been considered the European periphery with a chance to lead the way forward to a sustainable, clean and efficient energy policy. While promoting renewable energy generation represents an admirable goal, both governments and beneficiaries should also keep in mind other policy concerns, specifically the importance of free competition and the appropriate role of state aid in a market economy. On one hand, international obligations encourage states to increase their share of renewables; on the other, the very same rules prohibit them from dishing out excessive state aid. These are not conflicting goals, but two sides of the same coin. A wise support scheme should be formulated at the earliest stage to ensure compliance with state aid rules, so as to avoid any unwelcome surprises. Ad hoc and poorly thought-out measures, even if driven by good policy intentions, could cause significant headaches down the road. A well-developed renewables
policy must take the big picture and the longer term into consideration, including the broader effects of state support.
This article was originally published in the 2015 edition of Focus on Energy, the biennial publication of the Karanovic & Nikolic Energy and Infrastructure Industry Group.
*Veljko Smiljanic, Associate in the Belgrade office of Karanovic & Nikolic.
1 As an example, state aid, in particular in relation to shipyards, was a major issue in the final stages of the Croatian accession. Since the Energy Community mimics EU rules and procedures, the applicable treaties naturally also include rules on granting state aid for energy policy.
2 Therefore, subsidies granted to individuals or general measures affecting all companies are not covered by state aid restrictions (e.g. common taxes). State aid has to afford the beneficiary with a more favourable position, which it would not enjoy under normal market conditions (absent the aid). In the case of renewables, support mechanisms favour a specific industry sector, at the expense of the more traditional electricity generation methods.
3 An additional factor often required is for the measure to affect cross-border trade. Since electricity is a good which may be traded within the Energy Community, state aid granted to producers generally affects interstate trade and may distort competition since it improves the position of beneficiaries in relation to competing international undertakings.
4 “Incentive effect” means that the state aid influences the beneficiary to engage in an
activity which it wouldn’t carry out or would carry out differently, absent the aid. The aid must not subsidise costs of an activity that the beneficiary would bear anyhow, nor compensate for normal business risk. According to the Guidelines, in relation to renewables, incentive effect is supposed to induce the beneficiary to increase the level of environmental protection or improve the functioning of a secure, affordable and sustainable energy market.
5 For instance, if only a very limited number of projects or sites could be eligible, or in order to avoid strategic bidding or underbidding, or limiting bidding to specific technologies (in some instances). If an open bidding process was carried out, the European Commission shall consider that the aid is proportionate and does not cause distortions of competition.
6 While estimating a reasonable rate of return can be difficult, it should normally be at least equal to the weighted average cost of capital (e.g. for Estonia, the European Commission accepted a weighted average cost of capital of 10%). In Slovenia, the European Commission cleared a scheme with an estimated internal rate of return of 12%.
7 This is another reason why it is important to notify the measures to the local state aid control authority – if previously reviewed, state aid can be deemed “existing aid” upon accession. Existing aid get more favourable treatment than “new aid” in relation to the European Commission’s power of subsequent review. For new aid in particular, the European Commission could order the measure to be abolished and aid recovered, which was previously the case with power purchase agreements in Hungary and Poland. The Commission could require amendment, adjustment or abolition of existing aid, under more limited circumstances, but could not require its’ recovery.
Νame or company
________________________________________________________________Address
________________________________________________________________
Post code / Country: _______________________________________________
E-mail: _________________________________________________________
Tel.: ____________________________________________________________
I would like an invoice n
Profession: ______________________________________________________
T.V.A. / V.A.T.: ____________________________________________________
Method of payment
1) I enclose a cheque payable to TRIM S.A. n2) I made a deposit to National Bank of Greece n
IBAN: GR64 0110 1870 0000 1874 7003 251 – SWIFT/BIC ETHNGRAA
3) Please charge my credit card
Mastercard n Visa n Switch / Maestro nIssue number n n n n n n nCard nr.
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nExpires n n n nName on card
_________________________________________________________________
Signature _______________________________________________________
Date ____________________________________________________________
Annual subscription for Europe (bi-monthly / 6 Issues)
Educational Institutions & students 85 euros / year nCompanies & Executives Companies & individuals 100 euros / year n
Subscription with presentation Two pages company presentation 400 euros / year n
Yellow pages directory inclusion 100 euros / year n
Please complete this coupon and send it to the following address:
ROMANIAAll Media Designers S.R.L.energyworld Magazineșos. Nicolae Titulescu nr. 3Bloc A1, ap.62, et.8, Sector 1București, CP 011131, RomâniaTel.: +40 213110455E: [email protected]
GREECETRIM S.A.energyworld Magazine5, Grivogiorgou Street115 28 Athens - GreeceTel.: +30 210 7240510E: [email protected]
BULGARIAALEANA Commercial & Media Services Ltd energyworld Magazine145B, Rakovski Street,Sofia 1000, BulgariaTel.: +359 89 7617777E: [email protected]
www.energyworldmag.com
ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION
Your Energy Magazine for SE Europe & East Med
68 INTERNATIONAL
68 ALBANIA
68 BULGARIA
70 CROATIA
70 CYPRUS
72 GREECE
75 ROMANIA
79 SERBIA
80 TURKEY
67
21ENERGY DIRECTORY
68
INTERNATIONAL
DG Energy-European ComissionDM 2403/73 Rue J.-A. Demot 24, 1040, Brussels, Belgium Tel.: +32 229 92460 Email: [email protected] www.ec.europa.eu/energy
EWEA80, Rue d’Arlon, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel.: +32 2 213 1811 Email: [email protected] www.ewea.org/
International Energy Agency (IEA)9, rue de la Fédération, Paris Cedex 15, 75739 Paris-France Tel.: +33 1 40 57 65 00, Fax: +33 1 40 57 65 09 Email: [email protected] www.iea.org
IRENA - International Renewable Energy AgencyCI Tower, Khalidiyah (32nd) Street Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Tel.: +971 2 4179000 www.irena.org/
IRENA Innovation Technology CentreRobert-Schuman-Platz 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany Tel.: +49 (0) 228 391 79085 www.irena.org/
World Energy CouncilRegency House, 1-4 Warweek Street, 5th floor London, W1B 5LT, United Kingdom Tel.: +44 (0) 207734 5996 www.worldenergy.org
World Wind Energy Association5, Charles-de-Gaulle-Str., 53113 Bonn, Germany Tel.: +49 228 369 40 80 www.wwindea.org
ALBANIA
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSMinistry of Energy and IndustryDëshmorët & Kombit Boulevard, 1001 Tirana Tel.: +355 4 22222 45 ext.74111 Email: [email protected]
02. ENERGY COMPANIESAlbpetrol sh.aLagja 29 Marsi Patos Tel./Fax: +342 70 44 14, +342 70 44 13 E-mail: [email protected] www.albpetrol.net
Bankers Petroleum Ltd.Lagjja Kastrioti, Rr. Vasil Pecuke, Fier Tel.: +355 34 220845, Fax +355 34 220850 Email: [email protected] www.bankerspetroleum.com
Devoll Hydropower Sh.A. / StatkraftABA Business Centre, Office No. 1204, Papa Gjon Pali II Street, Tirana Tel: +355 4 450 1 450 Email: [email protected]
Kurum HoldingRr. Jul Variboba, Nr.1/21, Tirana Tel.: +355 4 229 05 00 Fax: +355 4 229 05 22 E-mail: [email protected]
03. LAW FIRMSCMS Adonnino Ascoli & Cavasola ScamoniRr. Sami Frasheri Red Building, 1001 Tirana Tel.: +335 4 4302123, Fax: +335 4 2400737 Email: [email protected] www.cms-aacs.com, www.cmslegal.com
IKRP Rokas & Partners Albania sh.p.k.Donika Kastrioti Str., Palace No. 14, Apartment 7A Tirana, Albania Tel.: +355 4 2267707 E-mail: [email protected] www.rokas.com/en/
Wolf Theiss AlbaniaEurocol Centre, 4th floor, Murat Toptani Street, 1001 Tirana Tel./ Fax: +355 4 2274 521 Email: [email protected] www.wolftheiss.com
BULGARIA
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSDKEVR8-10 Dondukov Blvd., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 988 8730, +359 2 9359 621 Email: [email protected] www.dker.bg
Ministry of Economy and Energy8, Slavyanska Str., Sofia 1052 Tel.: +359 2 9407001, +359 2 940 7545 Email: [email protected] www.mi.government.bg
Nuclear Regulatory Agency69 Shipchenski prokhod Blvd, 1574 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 9406-800 Email: [email protected] www.bnsa.bas.bg
Parliament Energy Commission 1 Knyaz Alexander I Sq., Sofia Tel.: +359 2 939 39 Email: [email protected] www.parliament.bg
Sustainable Energy Development Agency37 Ekzarh Yosiph Str., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 915 4012 Email: [email protected] www.seea.government.bg
2. NON GOVERNMENTAL Association of Producers of Ecological Energy 310 Vladislav Varnenchik Blvd., 9009 Varna Tel.: + 359 52 750 550 Email: [email protected] www.apee.bg
Balkan & Black Sea Petroleum Association2 Hristo Belchev Str., 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria Tel.: +359 2 986 06 85 Email: [email protected] www.bbspetroleum.com
BSK16-20 Alabin Str., Sofia 1000 Tel.: + 359 2 980 03 03, +359 2 932 09 28 Email: [email protected] www.bia-bg.com
Bulatom10 Vihren Str., 1618 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 439 03 02, Email: [email protected] www.bulatom-bg.org
Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry9 Iskar Str., Sofia 1058 Tel.: +359 2 987 78 26, +359 2 8117 445 Email: [email protected] www.bcci.bg
Bulgarian Photovoltaic Association42 Vitosha Blvd., Floor 2, App. 3, 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 44 222 28 Email: [email protected] www.bpva.org
Bulgarian Wind Energy Association 7 Paris Str., 5th Floor, Sofia 1000 Tel.: +359 2 4833820 Email: [email protected] www.bgwea.org
Energy Management Institute 5 Lege Str. 1st Floor, Sofia 1000 Tel.: +359 2 980 07 03, +359 2 950 62 10 Email: [email protected] www.emi-bg.com
KRIB8 Han Asparuh Str., 1463 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 981 9169 www.ceibg.bg
PublicsN7, Stefan Karadja Str., Entrance A, Sofia 1000 Tel.: +359 879436756 Email: [email protected] www.publics.bg
WWF Bulgaria38 Ivan Vazov Street, 2nd fl., 3th ap., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 29505040 Email: [email protected] www.wwf.bg
03. ENERGY COMPANIESAEC Kozlodui3321 Kozlodui Tel.: +359 973 7 2020 Email: [email protected] www.kznpp.org/
AESAES Maritza Iztok 1, 72 Lyuben Karavelov Str., Sofia Tel.: +359 42 901 634 Email: [email protected] www.aes.com
Brikel EADStara Zagora region, 6280 Galabovi Tel.: +359 8122000 www.brikel-bg.com/
Bulgarian Energy Holding16 Vesalec Str., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 926 38 00 Email: [email protected] www.bgenh.com
CEZ140 G.S. Rakovski Str., Sofia 1000 Tel.: +359 070010010 Email: [email protected] www.cez.bg
69
Contour GlobalContourGlobal Maritsa East 3 TPP, Mednikarovo, Stara Zagora 6294 Tel.: +359-42-663-251 Email: [email protected] www.contourglobal.com
Dalkia5 Janosh Huniadi Blvd, PO Box 26, Varna Tel.: +359 889311218 Email: [email protected] www.dalkia.bg
Energo-pro258 Vladislav Varnenchik Blvd, Varna Towers, Tower G, 9009 Varna Tel.: +359 52 660876 Email: [email protected] www.energo-pro.bg
ESOTriaditsa District, 105 Gotse Delchev Blvd., 1404 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 96-96-802 Email: [email protected] www.tso.bg
EVN37 Hristo G. Danov Str., 4000 Plovdiv Tel.: +359 700 1 7777 Email: [email protected] www.evn.bg
National Electricity Company 5 Vesalec Str., 1040 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 9263 636, +359 2 986 56 06 Email: [email protected] www.nek.bg
TEC Bobov DolGolyamo Selo vilage, 2600 Bulgaria Tel.: +359 701 50531 www.tecbd.com
TEC Sviloza EAD51 Krastio Sarafov Str., 1 floor, ap 1, 1421 Sofia Tel.: +359 42 615615 Email: [email protected] www.tpp-sviloza.bg
Toplophikacia BourgasLozovo District, North Industrial Zone, Heating Plant, 8000 Bourgass Tel.: +359 56 87 11 11 Email: [email protected] www.toplo-bs.com
Toplophikacia Pleven128 Eastern Industrial Zone, 5800 Pleven Tel.: +359 64 895 288 www.toplo-pleven.com
Toplophikacia RousseTEC Iztok Str., 7009 Rousse Tel.: +359 82 883311 Email: [email protected] www.toplo-ruse.com
Toplophikacia Sliven23 Stephan Karadja, 8800 Sliven Tel.: +359 44 622 722 Email: [email protected] http://new.sliven.net/toplo/
TPP Martza Iztok 2 6265 Kovachevo village, Stara Zagora district Tel.: +359 42 66 20 14, +359 42 66 29 19 Email: [email protected] www.tpp2.com
04. ALTERNATIVE ENERGYE.Mirolio EADIndustrial Zone, 8800 Sliven Tel.: +359 44612418 Email: [email protected] www.emiroglio.com
SolarPro Holding7 Sheinovo str., 1504 Sofia Email: [email protected] www.solarpro.bg
Smart Group35 N.Y.Vapcarov Street, Floor3, ap. 3A, 1407 Sofia Tel.: +359 884 369000, +90 532 566 2753 Email: [email protected] http://smartgroupint.com/
05. OIL & GASBulgargas47 Petar Parchevich Str., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 935 89 44, +359 2 935 89 88 Email: [email protected] www.bulgargaz.com
BulgartransgasPOB 3, Housing estate ”Ljulin-2”, 66 Pancho Vladigerov Blvd, Sofia 1336 Tel.: + 359 /2/ 939 63 00 Email: [email protected] http://www.bulgartransgaz.bg
Citigas Bulgaria EAD4 Adam Mitskevich Str. Tel.: +359 2 925 9495 Email: [email protected] www.citygas.bg/
DEXIA BULGARIA9160 Devnya Industrial Zone Tel.: +359 887077077 Email: [email protected]
Direct Petrolium Bulgaria/TransAtlantic16 Arh. J. Milanov str., 1164 Sofia Tel.: +3592 963 3244 Email: [email protected] www.transatlanticpetroleum.com/portfolio/bulgaria
Lukoil42, Todor Alexandrov Blvd, 1303 Bulgaria Tel.: +359 2 91 74 316 Email: [email protected] www.lukoil.bg
Melrose Resources Bulgaria 32 Marko Balabanov, 9000 Varna Tel.: +359 52 699 556 Email: [email protected] www.petroceltic.com/
OMV Bulgaria 1, Sofiiski Geroi Str., Sofia 1612 Tel.: +359 2 93 29710 Email: [email protected] www.omv.bg
Overgaz5 Philip Kutev Str., 1407 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 428 2000 Email: [email protected] www.overgas.bg
Petrol43, Cherni Vrah Blvd, 1407 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 4960 300 www.petrol.bg
Shell Bulgaria 48, Sitniakovo Blvd, Serdica Office, 8 floor, 1505 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 960 1752 Email: [email protected] www.shell.bg
Toplivo2, Solunska Str., Sofia 1000 Tel.: +359 2 9333 570 Email: [email protected] www.toplivo.bg
06. MAINTENANCEAtomenergoremontKozloduy NPP site, 3321 Kozloduy Tel.: +359 973 80018 Email: [email protected] www.aer-bg.com/
Centralna Energoremontna Baza1 Lokomotiv Str., 1220 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 8105 454 Email: [email protected] http://cerb.bg/
Chimcomplect205, Al. Stamboliyski, Blvd., 1309 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 822 34 60 Email: [email protected] www.chimcomplect-eng.bg
Enemona20 Kosta Lulchev Str., Sofia 1113 Tel.: +359 2 80 54 850 Email: [email protected] www.enemona.bg
Energoremont Holding34 Totleben Blvd., 1606 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 8133577 Email: [email protected] www.erhold.bg/bg
Energoremont – Galabovo6280 Galabovo Tel.: +359 418 62086 Email: [email protected] www.energoremont-bg.com
Risk Enegenering10 Vihren Str., Sofia 1618 Tel.: +359 2 8089 702 www.riskeng.bg
07. ELECTRICITY TRAdERSDANS120D, Simeonovsko Shose Blvd, 1700 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 42 100 10 www.dansenergy.eu
EFG10, Vihren Str., Pavlovo distr., Sofia Tel.: + 359 2 892 88 08 Email: [email protected] www.efg.bg
EFT19, George Washington Street, 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 439 9010 Email: [email protected] www.eft-group.net
Energy MT8, Bacho Kiro, 1000 Sofia Email: [email protected] www.emtbg.com/
70
OET38, Bokar Blvd, 1404 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 854 81 38, +359 894 777846 Email: [email protected] www.oet-energy.com
08. LAW FIRMSBALMS2, General Totleben Street, floor 4, 1606 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 411 0004 Email: [email protected] www.balmsbulgaria.com
Batkov & Assocs.48, Alabin Str., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 9335611 Email: [email protected] www.batkov.com
CMS Cameron McKenna14, Tzar Osvoboditel Blvd, 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 897860421 Email: [email protected] www.cms-cmck.com/Sofia-CMS-CMCK-Bulgaria
I. K. Rokas & Partners Law Firm – Branch Bulgaria, I. Rokas12-16, Dragan Tzankov Blvd., Lozenetz Square, 1164 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 9521131 Fax: (+359 2) 9520680 E-mail: [email protected] www.rokas.com/en/
Tocheva&Mandajieva26, Stoyan Mihaylovski Str., fl. 5, 1164 Sofia Tel.: +359 888584000 Email: [email protected] www.tmlawoffice.bg
Wolf Theiss 29, Atanas Dukov Str., Rainbow Centre, Sofia 1407 Tel.: +359 2 86 13 700 Email: [email protected] www.wolftheiss.com/index.php/Bulgaria.html
Vladimirov&Kiskinov43, Gen. Eduard Totleben Blvd, Fl.1, At.1, Sofia Tel.: +359 888 15 34 12, +359 2 988 18 28 Email: [email protected] www.dvlmp.eu
09. CONSULTANTSEnergeo279 B Tzar Boris III Bd, Sofia 1619 Tel.: +359 2 902 6580 Email: [email protected] http://energeo.bg
10. PRAMI Communications135 B, G.S.Rakovski Str., floor 2, Sofia 1000 Tel.: +359 2 989 5115 Email: [email protected] www.amic.bg
D&D54, W. Gladstone Str., 1000 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 866 98 99 Email: [email protected] www.ddagency.com
Ikona43, Nishava Str., Sofia 1680 Tel.: +359 2 958 30 Email: [email protected] www.icona-bg.com
MARKETOR3A, Nikolay Haytov Str., ESTE Office Building, fl. 1, office 15, 1113 Sofia Tel.: +359 2 423 07 97 Email: [email protected] www.marketorbg.com
CROATIA
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSCroatian Energy Regulatory Agency (HERA)14, Grada Vukovara Street, 10000 Zagreb Tel.: +385 1 6323 777, +385 1 6323 700 Fax: +385 1 6115 344 Email: [email protected] www.hera.hr/en/html/index.html
Ministry of the Economy78, Grada Vukovara Street, 10000 Zagreb Tel.: +385 1 6106 113, Fax: +385 1 6109 113 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.mingo.hr/en
02. OIL & GASINA – Industrija nafte d.d.10, Veceslava Holjevca Ave., p.p. 555, 10002 Zagreb Tel: +385 (0)1 6450 000 Email: [email protected] http://www.ina.hr
PLINACRO d.o.o.88a, Savska Road, 10000 Zagreb Tel.: +385 1 6301 777, Fax: +385 1 6301 724 Email: [email protected] www.plinacro.hr
03. CONSULTANTSCEI24, Miramarska, 10000 Zagreb Tel.: +385 1 64 30 600, Fax: +385 1 64 30 626 Email: [email protected] http://cei.hr/en/
04. PRAction Global Communications11, Franje Rackog, 10000 Zagreb Tel.: +385 1 455 22 27 Email: [email protected] www.actionprgroup.com
05. LAW FIRMSIKRP Rokas & Partners - Par & Gradac Law FirmKralja Drzislava 2, Zagreb Tel.: +385 1 4670281, Fax: +385 1 4612883 E-mail: [email protected] www.rokas.com/en/
CYPRUS
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSCommission for the Protection of Competition (C.P.C) of the Republic of Cyprus53, Strovolos Ave., 2018 Strovolos, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 606600 www.competition.gov.cy
Cyprus Association of Renewable Energy Enterprises (SEAPEK)30 Griva Digeni Avenue, 1080 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 665102 Fax: +357 22 669459 www.seapek.com
Cyprus Chamber of Commerce and Industry38, Griva Digeni Ave. & 3 Deligiorgi Str., Tel.: +357 22 889800 Email: [email protected] www.ccci.org.cy/
Cyprus Energy Agency10-12 Lefkonos Street, 1011 Nikosia Tel.: +357 22 667716, +357 22 667726 Email: [email protected] www.cea.org.cy
Cyprus Energy Regulatory Authority81-83 Griva Digeni Avenue, IAKOVIDI Building, 3rd Floor, 1080 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 666363 Email: [email protected] www.cera.org.cy
Cyprus Hydrocarbons Company Ltd53, Strovolos Ave., Victory Building 2018 Strovolos, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 203880 Fax: +357 22 311646
Cyprus Institute of Energy2 Agapinoros & Arch. Makariou III, Megaro IRIS, 1st Floor, 1076 Nicosia Tel. +357 22 606060 Fax:+357 22 606001/2 E-mail:[email protected]
Cyprus Transmission System Operator of Electrical Energy68, Evangelistrias Street, CY-2057 Strovolos Tel.: +357 22 611 611 Email: [email protected] www.dsm.org.cy/
Cyprus Organisation for Storage and Management of Oil Stocks (COSMOS)27, Heracleous Str., 2nd floor, Office 203, 2040 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 81 81 00 Email: [email protected] www.kodap.org.cy
Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and EnvironmentLouki Akrita Street, 1411 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 408305 Email: [email protected] www.moa.gov.cy
Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism of the Republic of CyprusEnergy Sector 6, Andreas Araouzos Str., CY-1421, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22867100 Email: [email protected] www.mcit.gov.cy
Ministry of FinanceMichael Karaoli & Gregori Afxentiou, 1439 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22602723 Email: [email protected] www.mof.gov.cy
71
Ministry of Foreign AffairsPresidential Palace Avenue, 1447 Nicosia Tel: +357 22 651000 Fax: +357 22 661881 Email: [email protected] www.mfa.gov.cy
Natural Gas Public Company (DEFA)13 Limassol Avenue, Demetra Tower, 4th Floor, 2112 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 761 761 Email: [email protected] www.defa.com.cy
Presidency of the Republic of CyprusPresidential Palace, 1400 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 867400 Email: infopresidency.gov.cy www.presidency.gov.cy
02. SEMI GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONSElectricity Authority of Cyprus11 Amfipoleos Str., 2025 Strovolos, 1399 Lefkosia Tel.: +357-22 20 10 00 Email: [email protected] www.eac.com.cy
03. INSTITUTIONSCyprus Institute of Energy2 Agapinoros & 3 Arch. Makariou, Megaro IRIS, 1st Floor, 1076 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 606060 Email: [email protected] www.cie.org.cy
04. AUdIT COMPANIESBAKER TILLYC Hatzopoulou & 30, Grivas Dighenis Avenue 1066 Nicosia Tel: +357 22 458500 Fax: +357 22 751648 Email: [email protected] www.bakertillyklitou.com
C.O. Cyprus Opportunity Energy Public Company Limited13, Karaiskakis Str., Limassol 3601 Tel.: +357 25 800441 Email: [email protected] www.oilandgas.com.cy
Deloitte Cyprus24, Spyrou Kyprianou Avenue, 1075 Nicosia Tel.: + 357 22 360300 Fax: + 357 22 360400 www.deloitte.com
KPMG Limited14, Esperidon Str., 1087 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 209000 Fax: +357 22 678200 Εmail: [email protected] www.kpmg.com/cy/
Kyprianidis, Nicolaou & Associates48, Themistoklis Dervis Avenue, Office 401, 1066 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 756585 Email: [email protected] www.kyprianides.com/
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS3 Artemidos Avenue, Artemidos Tower, 7th & 8th Floors, CY-6020 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 555 000 www.pwc.com/cy
05. LAW FIRMSAntonis Paschalides & CO. LLCMakarios Ave. & Agias Elenis 36, Galaxias Building, Office 502, Nicosia 1061 Tel: +357 22 661 661 www.paschalides.com
Christos M. Triantafyllidis2, Evagorou Str., Irini Megaron, 3rd floor, Office 31-33, 1521 Nicosia www.christriantafyllides.com
Cyprus Legal Answers31, Estias Street, Aradippou, 7041 Larnaka Tel.: +357 99 641265, Fax: +357 22 672 333 Email: [email protected] www.cypruslegalanswers.com
Kyriakides & XenofontosTel.: +357 25 352352, Fax: +357 25 352353 www.oilandgaslawyers.eu
Michael Damianos & Co LLC42E, Arch. Makarios Avenue, 1065 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 021212, Fax: +357 22 021213 http://damianoslaw.com
Pamboridis LLC45, Digeni Akrita Avenue, 1070 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 752525, Fax: +357 22 752800 Email: [email protected] www.pamboridis.com
06. CONSULTANTSANETEL Larnaca District Development Agency2 Ag. Lazarou Str., 7040 Voroklini Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 815280 Email: [email protected] www.anetel.com/
Aristodemou Nicolas5A, Afxentiou Str., 2ndFloor, CY-1309, Nicosia Email: [email protected] www.nea-consult.com
Aspen Trust GroupElia House, 77 Limassol Avenue, 2121 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 418888 Fax: +357 22 418890 Email: [email protected] www.aspentrust.com
BIZSERV32, Georgiou Griva Digeni Ave., 1066 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 375504 Fax: +357 22377583 Email: [email protected]
Cba Conquest Business Advisors176, Athalassis Avenue, CY2025 Strovolos, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 820800 Email: [email protected] www.cba.com.cy/
Envitech Ltd9 Antonis Papadopoulos Str., Paralimni Tel.: +357 23 743440 Email: [email protected] www.envitech.org/el
Eurosuccess consulting56 Stavrou Avenue, Karyatides Business Center, Block A2, Office 205, 2035 Strovolos, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 420110 Fax: +357 22 518248 Email: [email protected] www.eurosc.eu/
Hiteco Ltd33, Egyptou Str., 3087 Limassol Tel.: +357 25 870634 Email: [email protected] www.hiteco-eng.com
Kassinis International ConsultingOffice 502, Kennedy Business Centre 12, Kennedy Ave, Ayioi Omologites, 1087 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 663280, Fax: +357 22 669469 Email: [email protected] www.kassinis-consulting.com
ServPRO Accoutants & Business Consultants28, Kennedy Avenue, Office 401, 1087 Nicosia Tel: +357 22 021100 Fax: +357 22 757566 E-Mail: [email protected] www.servpro.com.cy
Shipcon Limassol Ltd5, Spyrou Kyprianou Street, Makedonias Court, office 401, 4001 Mesa Geitonia, Limassol Tel.: + 357 25 334250, Fax: +357 25 255262 E-mail: [email protected] shipcon.eu.com
Value Creation Consulting Ltd13A, Iras Street, 1061 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 100206 Email: [email protected] www.valuecreation.eu/
07. OIL & GASA.M.K. EcoLeaf Ltd - ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS15, Dodekanisou Str., Anthoupoli, Nicosia 2302 Tel.: +357 22 720670 Email: [email protected] www.ecoleaf.eu/
BP Eastern Mediterranean LtdDekhelia Rd, 6301 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 812849 Email: [email protected]
EDT OffshorePO Box 54548, Yermasoyia, Limassol 3725 Tel: +357 25 899000, Fax: +357 25 899002 Email: [email protected] www.edtoffshore.com
Employers & Industrialists Federation2, Acropoleos Ave. & Glafkou Str., 1511 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 66 51 02 Email: [email protected] www.oeb.org.cy/home
Eni Cyprus Ltd81-83, Grivas Digenis Avenue, 1090 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 503232, Fax: +357 22 503001 Email: [email protected]
Exxonmobil Cyprus Inc6 Ag. Prokopiou Str., Eggomi, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 393101
Gulf Agency Company Limited83, Franklin Roosevelt Av., Limassol Tel: +357 25 209100, Fax: +357 25 209201 Email: [email protected] www.gac.com/cyprus
72
Hellenic Petroleum Cyprus Ltd3, Ellispontou Str., 2015 Strovolos Tel.: +357 22 477000 www.eko.com.cy
Intergaz LtdDhekelia Rd, 6303 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 821 666 Email: [email protected] http://intergaz.com.cy/
Lanitis Green Energy Group Ltd107B Nicou Pattichi Str., 3070 Limassol Tel.: +357 25 822314 www.lgeg.com.cy
Lukoil Cyprus Ltd11, Limassol Ave., 5th Floor, 2112 Aglanja, Nicosia Tel.: +357 70001000 Email: [email protected] www.lukoil.com.cy/
MedServ (Cyprus) Limited13, Karaiskaki Street, 3032 Limassol
Noble Energy International ltd.73, Metochiou Street, 2407 Egnomi, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 449190, Fax: +357 22 449208 Email: [email protected] www.nobleenergyinc.com
OAG Offshore Rentals East Med LtdTel.: +357 97 884535 Email: [email protected] www.oageastmed.com
PETROLINA1, Kilkis Str., 6015 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 848000 Email: [email protected] www.petrolina.com.cy/
PPT Aviation Services Ltd1, Kilkis Str., 6015 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 620885
Schlumberger Limited (SCYL Limited)2-4, Makariou III Ave., 1065 Nicosia
SynergasDhekelia Rd, 6303 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 635286
Total G&P Cyprus48, Themistocli Dervi, 5th floor, 1066 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 202806, Fax: +357 22 202801 Email: [email protected] total.com
VTT Vasiliko Ltd (A VTTI Group Company)Oil Storage Terminal, 75 Mari, 7736 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 257500, Fax: +357 24 333299 Email: [email protected] www.vtti.com –
08. ELECTRICITYFALCON ELECTRICITY POWER135, Omonoias Ave, 8th floor, 3045 Limassol Tel.: +357 25 028560 Email: [email protected] http://falconelectricity.com/
ΔΕΗ Quantum EnergyTel.: +357 22 792200 Email: [email protected] www.dei-quantumenergy.com
09. CENTRAL HEATINGLAKO241, Protaras Avenue, 5311 Paralimni Tel.: +357 23 821939 Email: [email protected] www.lako.com.cy/
A.N.T. METALLOFABRICA LTD6 Rodionos K. Riga, Ag. Athanasios Industrial Estate Tel.: +357 25 724820 Email: [email protected] www.metallofabrica.com/
Narkissos AirconCorner Makarious Ave. & Theodorou Potamianou www.narkissoscy.com/articles/view/home
PANARIS & ASSOCIATES ELECTROTHERM LTD42 Gregoris Afxentiou Str., Ayios Dometios, Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 783090 Email: [email protected] www.panaris.com.cy
iClima LtdOffice 1D, 16, August Str., 1040 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 43 43 43, Email: [email protected] / www.iclima.com.cy
Build Shield8 Oidipodos Str., 6058 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 102 830 Email: [email protected] http://build-shield.com/
Aristides S. Air Control Services Ltd1, 28th October Ave, Block C, Office 208, 2414 Egkomi Tel.: +357 22 444660 Email: [email protected] www.aristidesaircontrol.com/
Terza Solar Power22, Archiepiskopou Kyprianou Street Tel.: +357 24 664532 Email: [email protected] , [email protected] www.terzasolarpower.com
MTV WATER SERVICES146 Vasileos Kon/nou, Shop 1,2 Tsirio, Limassol 3080 Tel.: +357 25 389155 Email: [email protected] www.mtvwaterservices.com
CHR SKARPARIS LTD 22, Mixalakopoulou Str., 1685 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 764308, Email: [email protected] / www.skarparis.com
10. ALTERNATIVE ENERGYA.S.G. Solar Technologies Ltd28, Kinyras Street, Shop A, 8011 Paphos Tel.: 7777 7652, Fax +357 26 822 513 Email: [email protected]
Aeoliki Ltd41, Themistokli Dervi Street, 1066 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 875707, Fax: +357 22 757778 Email: [email protected] www.aeoliki.com
Energy Sequel3, Costa Loizou Street, Latsia, 2222 Nicosia Tel: +357 96 276761 E-mail: [email protected] www.energysequel.com
Ergo Energy47, 28th October Street, 2414 Engomi - Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 505404 Email: [email protected] www.ergoenergy.com.cy
Neon Energy41-43, Sp. Kyprianou Avenue, 6051 Larnaca Tel.: +357 24 636004, Fax: +357 24 636012 Email: [email protected] www.neonenergy.com/en/cyprus
Save Electricity Solutions4, Elenis Loizidou Street, 2042 Strovolos, Nicosia Tel.: +357 99 905645, Fax: +357 22 540277 Email: [email protected] www.save-electricity.com.cy
11. PRACTION GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS6, Kondilaki Street, 1090 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 818 884 Email: [email protected] www.actionprgroup.com
Gnora2, Agathokleous Street, 2000 Strovolos Tel.: +357 22 441922, Fax: +357 22 519743 Email: [email protected] www.gnora.com
MarketwayMarketway Building, 20, Karpenisiou Street, 1077 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 391000, Fax: +357 22 391150 Email: [email protected] www.marketway.com.cy
12. EdUCATION INSTITUTESEuropean University of Cyprus6, Diogenis Str., Engomi, 1516 Nicosia Tel: +357.22.713000 www.euc.ac.cy
Levantine Training Centre5, Spyrou Kyprianou Street, Makedonias Court, Office 401, 4001 Limassol Tel.: +357 25 334250, Fax: +357 25 255262 Email: [email protected] www.levantinetrainingcentre.com
UClan Cyprus 12-14 Panepistimiou Avenue, 7080 Pyla Tel.: +357 24 694000, +357 24 812121 Fax: +357 24 81 21 20 [email protected] www.uclancyprus.ac.cy
University of Cyprus1, Panepistimiou Avenue, 1678 Nicosia Tel.: +357 22 894000 Email.: [email protected]
GREECE
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSMinistry of Reconstruction of Production, Environment and Energy (YPAPEN)17, Amaliados Str., 115 23 Athens Tel.: +30 213 1515000, Fax: +30 210 6447608 Email: [email protected] www.ypeka.gr
Public Gas Corporation S.A. (DEPA)92, Marinou Antipa Ave., 141 21 Heraklion Tel: +30 210 2701000, Fax: +30 210 2701010 Email: [email protected] www.depa.gr
Hellenic Transmission System Operator (DESMIE)72 Kastoros Str.,185 45 Piraeus Tel.: +30 210-9466700, Fax: +30 210-9466766 Email: [email protected] www.desmie.gr
Independent Power Transmission Operator (ADMIE)89 Dyrrachiou Str., 104 43 Athens Tel.: +30 210-5192281, Fax: +30 210-5192504 Email: [email protected] www.admie.gr
Hellenic Gas Transmission System Operator S.A. (DESFA)357-359, Messogion Ave., 152 31 Chalandri Tel.: +30 210 6501200, Fax: +30 210-6749504 Email: [email protected] www.desfa.gr
73
Greek Atomic Energy Commission (GAEC)Patriarhou Grigoriou & Neapoleos, P.O Box 60092, 153 10 Agia Paraskevi Tel.: +30 210-6506700 Fax: +30 210-6506748 Email: [email protected] www.eeae.gr
Hellenic Electricity Distribution Network Operator S.A. (DEDDIE)20, Perraivou & 5 Kallirrois Str., 117 43 Athens Tel./Fax: +30 210-9281698 Email: [email protected] www.deddie.gr
Centre for Renewable Energy Sources and Saving (KAPE) 19th km Marathonos Ave, 19009 Pikermi Tel.: +30 210-6603300, Fax: +30 210-6603301 Email: [email protected] www.cres.gr
Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) 132, Pireos Str., 118 54 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3727400, Fax: +30 210-3255460 Email: [email protected] www.rae.gr
Foundation for Economic and Industrial Research11, Tsami Karatasou Str., 117 42 Athens Tel.: +30 210-9211200, Fax: +30 210-9228130 Email: [email protected] www.iobe.gr
02. NON GOVERNMENTALInstitute of Energy For South-East Europe (IENE)3, Alex. Soutsou Str., 106 71 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3628457 Fax: +30 210-3646144 Email: [email protected] www.iene.gr
Operator of Electricity Market S.A.72, Kastoros Str., 185 45 Piraeus Tel.: +30 211-880700, Fax: +30 211-8806766 Email: [email protected] www.lagie.gr
03. FEdERATIONS - UNIONSFederation of Hellenic Recycling & Energy Recovery Industries57, Ethnikis Antistaseos Str., 152 31 Halandri Tel.: +30 210-6931 011, Fax: +30 210-6931012 Email: [email protected] www.sevian.gr
Hellenic Federation of Enterprises (SEB)5, Xenofontos Str., 105 57 Athens Tel.: +30 211 5006000, Fax: +30 210 3222929 Email: [email protected] www.sev.org.gr
04. ASSOCIATIONSHellenic Association for the Cogeneration of Heat and Power7, Ioustinianou Str., 114 73 Athens Tel.: +30 210 8219118, Fax: +30 210-8821917 Email: [email protected] www.hachp.gr
Hellenic Association of Independent Power ProducersEmail: [email protected] www.haipp.gr
Hellenic Association of Photovoltaic Energy Producers (SPEF)3, Dimokratias Str., 151 21 Pefki Tel./Fax: +30 210-6854035 Email: [email protected] www.spef.gr
Hellenic Association of Photovoltaic Investors (PASYF) 1, Archimidous Str., Nea Alikarnassos, 716 01 Iraklio Creta Tel./Fax: +30 2821-078409 Email: [email protected] www.pasyf.gr
Hellenic Biofuels & Biomass Association (SBIBE)4, Ioanni Tsalouchidis Str., 542 48 Thessaloniki Tel.: +30 2310 330501 Fax: +30 2310 330502 Email: [email protected] www.sbibe.gr
Hellenic Petroleum Marketing Companies Association46, Ionos Dragoumi Str., 115 28 Athens Tel.: +30 210 7291050, Fax: +30 210-7245172 Email: [email protected] www.seepe.gr
Hellenic Small Hydropower Association (HSHA)23, Agias Lavras Str., 141 21 Iraklio Tel.: +30 210-2811917, Fax: +30 210-2837372 Email: [email protected] www.microhydropower.gr
Hellenic Union of Industries Consumers of Energy (UNICEN) 57, Ethnikis Antistaseos Str., 152 31 Halandri Tel.: +30 210-6861489, Fax: +30 210-6283496 Email: [email protected] www.unicen.gr
Hellenic Wind Energy Association (HWEA) ELETAEN306, kifissias Ave., 1st Floor, 152 32 Athens Tel./Fax: +30 210-8081755 Email: [email protected] www.eletaen.gr
Greek Association of RES Electricity Producers85, Mesogion Str., 115 26 Athens Tel.: +30 210- 6968418, Fax: +30 210-6968031 Email: [email protected] www.hellasres.gr
Greek Biomass Association (HELLABIOM)150, Andrea Papandreou Avenue, 165 61 Glifada Tel.: +30 210 9652031, Fax: +30 210-9652081 Email: [email protected] www.hellabiom.gr
05. ELECTRICITYElpedison Energy8-10, Sorou Str., Building C, 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 211-2117400, Fax: +30 210-3441255 Email: [email protected] www.elpedison.gr
Heron S.A.85, Mesogion Ave., 115 26 Athens Tel.: +30 213-0333000, Fax: +30 210-6968690 Email: [email protected] www.heron.gr
M&M Gas5-7, Patroklou Str., 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-68777300, Fax: +30 210-6877400 Email: [email protected] www.mytilineos.gr
Protergia S.A.8, Artemidos Str., 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-3448300, Fax: +30 210-3448471 Email: [email protected] www.protergia.gr
Public Power Corporation S.A. (DEH)30, Halkokondili Str., 104 32 Athens Tel.: +30 210-5230301, Fax: +30 210-5237727 Email: [email protected] www.dei.gr
06. FUELSAegean S.A.10, Akti Kondili Str., 185 45 Piraeus Tel.: +30 210-4586000, Fax: +30 210-4586241 Email: [email protected] www.aegeanoil.gr
Avinoil S.A.12A, Herodou Attikou Str., 151 24 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-8093500, Fax: +30 210-8093555 Email: [email protected] www.avinoil.gr
BP Elliniki S.A. Petroleum26, Kifissias Av. & 2, Paradissou Str.,151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-6887777, Fax: +30 210-6887697 Email: [email protected] www.bp.com
Coral S.A.12A, Herodou Attikou Str., 151 24 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-9476000, Fax: +30 210-9476500 Email: [email protected] www.coralenergy.gr
Coral Gas (Hellas)26-28, G. Averof Str., 142 32 Perissos Tel.: +30 210-9491000, Fax: +30 210-9407987 Email: [email protected] www.coralgas.gr
Cyclon Hellas S.A.124, Megaridos Avenue, 193 00 Aspropyrgos Tel.: +30 210-8093900, Fax: +30 210-8093999 Email: [email protected] www.cyclon.gr
Eko AEBE8, Chimaras Str., 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-7705201, Fax: +30 210-7705847 Email: [email protected] www.eko.gr
Elinoil S.A.33, Pigon Str., 145 64 Kifissia Tel.: +30 210-6241500, Fax: +30 210-6241509 Email: [email protected] www.elin.gr
74
Eteka S.A.142, Dimokratias Avenue, 188 63 Perama Tel.: +30 210-4022401 Fax: +30 210-4415879 Email: [email protected] www.eteka.com.gr
Hellenic Fuels S.A.8, Chimaras Str., 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-6887111 Fax: +30 210-6887100 Email: [email protected] www.hellenicfuels.gr
Hellenic Petroleum Group (ELPE)8A, Chimaras Str., 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-6302000, Fax: +30 210-6302510 Email: [email protected] www.helpe.gr
Mamidoil-Jetoil S.A.27, Evrota & Kiphissou Str., 145 64 Kifissia Tel.: +30 210-8763100, Fax: +30 210-8055850 Email: [email protected] www.jetoil.gr
Motor Oil Gas S.A.12A, Herodou Attikou Str., 151 24 Maroussi Tel.: +30 210-8094000 Fax: +30 210-8094444 Email: [email protected] www.moh.gr
Revoil S.A.5, Kapodistriou Str., 166 72 Vari Tel.: +30 210 8976000, Fax: +30 210 8972137 Email: [email protected] www.revoil.gr
07. OIL & GASCopelouzos Group209, Kifissias Avenue, 151 24 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-6141106-115 Fax: +30 210-6140371 Email: [email protected] www.copelouzos.gr
Energean Oil & Gas32, Kifissias Ave. Atrina Center, 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-8174200, Fax: +30 210-8174299 Email: [email protected] www.energean.com
EPA Attikis11, Sof. Venizelou Ave. & Serron Str., 141 23 Lykovrisi Tel.: +30 210-3406000, Fax: +30 210-3406060 Email: [email protected] www.aerioattikis.gr
EPA Thessalias219, Farsalon Str., 413 35 Larissa Tel.: +30 2410-582300, Fax: +30 2410-582323 Email: [email protected] www.epathessalia.gr
EPA Thessalonikis 256, Monastiriou & 7, Glinou Str., 546 28 Thessaloniki Tel.: +30 2310-584000, Fax: +30 2310-500577 Email: [email protected] www.epathessaloniki.gr
Prometheus Gas 209, Kifissias Avenue, 151 24 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-6141106, Fax: +30 210-6140371 Email: [email protected] www.copelouzos.gr
Trans Adriatic Pipeline AG Greece, BranchAthens Tower, 21st Floor, 2-4, Messogion Avenue 115 27 Athens Tel.: +30 210-7454613, Fax: +30 210-7454300 Email: [email protected] www.trans-adriatic-pipeline.com/gr
08. ALTERNATIVE ENERGYABB13th klm National Road Athinon-Lamias 144 52 Metamorfosi Tel.: +30 210-2891500, Fax: +30 210-2891599 Email: [email protected] www.abb.gr
Big Solar 100, Nato Avenue, 193 00 Aspropyrgos Tel.: +30 210-5509090, Fax: +30 210-5594559 Email: [email protected] www.bigsolar.gr
Biosar Energy Aktor-Ellaktor25, Ermou Str., 145 64 Kifissia Tel.: +30 210-8185200, Fax: +30 210-8185201 Email: [email protected] www.biosar.gr
EDF EN Hellas120 ,Vas. Sofias Avenue, 115 26 Athens Tel.: +30 210-6462079, Fax: +30 210-6431420 Email: [email protected] www.edf-energies-nouvelles.com
Enteka2, Tichis Str., 152 33 Chalandri Tel.: +30 210-6816803, Fax: +30 210-6816460 Email: [email protected] www.enteka.gr
Gamesa9, Adrianiou Str., 115 25 Athens Tel.: +30 210-6753300, Fax: +30 210-6753305 Email: [email protected] www.gamesacorp.com
Mechatron226, Kifissias Avenue, 152 31 Chalandri Tel.: +30 210-6899314, Fax: +30 210-6899314 www.mechatron.eu
PPC Renewables S.A.3, Kapodistriou Str., 153 43 Ag. Paraskevi Tel.: +30 211-2118000, Fax: +30 211-2118089 Email: [email protected] www.ppcr.gr
Rokas Renewables S.A.3, Rizareiou Str., 152 33 Chalandri Tel.: +30 210-8774100, Fax: +30 210-8774111 Email: [email protected] www.rokasrenewables.gr
Schneider Electric Greece19th klm National Road Athinon-Lamias 146 71 Nea Erithrea Tel.: +30 210-6295200, Fax: +30 210-6295210 Email: [email protected] www.schneider-electric.gr
Silcio38-40, Kapodistriou Avenue, 151 23 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-6848506, Fax: +30 210-6838215 Email: [email protected] www.silcio.gr
SMA Solar Technology AG 102, V.Tsitsani Str., 166 75 Glifada Tel.: +30 210-9856660, Fax: +30 210-9856670 Email: [email protected] www.SMA-Hellas.com
Solar Cells Hellas64, Kifissias Avenue & Premetis Str., 151 25 Marousi Tel.: +30 210-9595159, Fax: +30 210-9537618 Email: [email protected] www.schellas.gr
Terna Energy S.A.85, Messogion Avenue, 115 26 Athens Tel.: +30 210-6968300, Fax: +30 210-6968096 Email: [email protected] www.terna-energy.com
09. LAW FIRMSKelemenis & Co. Law Firm5, Tsakalof Str., Melathron Centre, 106 73 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3612800, Fax: +30 210-3612820 Email: [email protected] www.kelemenis.com
Metaxas Law154, Asklipiou Str., 114 71 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3390748, Fax: +30 210-3390749 Email: [email protected] www.metaxaslaw.gr
Rokas International Law Firm25 & 25A, Boukourestiou Str., 106 71 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3616816, Fax: +30 210-3615425 Email: [email protected], [email protected] www.rokas.com
10. CONSULTANTS Asprofos Engineering S.A.284 El. Venizelou Ave., 176 75 Kallithea Tel.: +30 210-9491600, Fax: +30 210-9191610 Email: [email protected] www.asprofos.gr
Consolidated Contractors Company 62B Kifissias Avenue, PO Box 61092, 151 10 Maroussi Tel.: +30 210-6182000, Fax: +30 210-6199224 Email: [email protected] www.ccc.gr
11. EMBASSIES Embassy of Boulgaria33A, Stratigou Kallari Str., 154 52 P. Psychiko Tel.: +30 210-6748105, Fax: +30 210-6748130 Email: [email protected] www.mfa.bg
Embassy of Canada4, Ioannou Gennadiou Street, 115 21 Athens Tel.: +30-210-7273400 Fax: +30-210-7273480 Email: [email protected] www.canadainternational.gc.ca/greece-grece/
Embassy of Cyprus16, Irodotou Str., 106 75 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3734800, Fax: +30 210-7258886 Email: [email protected] www.mfa.gov.cy
Embassy of France7, Vas. Sofias Ave., 106 71 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3391000, Fax: +30 210-3391009 Email: [email protected] www.ambafrance-gr.org
Embassy of Germany3, Karaoli & Dimitriou Str., 106 75 Athens Tel.: +30 210-7285111, Fax: +30 210-7285335 www.athen.diplo.de
75
Embassy of Israel1, Marathonodromon Str., 154 52 P. Psychiko Tel.: +30 210-6705500, Fax: +30 210-6705555 Email: [email protected] embassies.gov.il
Embassy of Romania7, Emmanouil Benaki Str., 154 52 P. Psychiko Tel.: +30 210-6728875, Fax: +30 210-6728883 Email: [email protected] atena.mae.ro
Embassy of the Russian Federation 28, Nikiforou Lytra Str., 154 52 P. Psychiko Tel.: +30 210-6725235, Fax: +30 210-6749708 Email: [email protected] www.greece.mid.ru
Embassy of Ucraine2, Stephanou Delta Str., 152 37 Filothei Tel.: +30 210-6800230, Fax: +30 210-6854154 Email: [email protected] greece.mfa.gov.ua
Embassy of United States Of America91, Vas. Sofias Ave., 101 60 Athens Tel.: +30 210-7212951 Fax: +30 210-7212951 Email: [email protected] athens.usembassy.gov
12. CHAMBERS American-Hellenic Chamber of Commerce109-111, Messoghion Ave., 115 26 Athens Tel.: +30 210-6993559, Fax: +30 210-6985686 Email: [email protected] www.amcham.gr
Greek-German Chamber10-12, Dorileou Str., 115 21 Athens Tel.: +30 210-6419000, Fax: +30 210-6445175 Email: [email protected] griechenland.ahk.de
Union of Hellenic Chambers 6, Akadimias Str., 106 71 Athens Tel.: +30 210-3387104, Fax: +30 210-3622320 Email: [email protected] www.acci.gr
13. INdUSTRY Mytilineos Group5-7, Patroklou Str., 151 25 Maroussi Tel.: +30 210-6877300 Fax: +30 210-6877400 Email: [email protected] www.mytilineos.gr
Hellenic Halyvourgia86A, Othonos & Kokkota Str., 145 61 Kifissia Tel.: +30 210-6283400 Fax: +30 210-8015614 Email: [email protected] www.hlv.gr
Allouminion Ellados8, Artemidos Str., 151 25 Maroussi Tel.: +30 210-3693000, Fax: +30 210-3693108 Email: [email protected] www.alhellas.com
Metka Group8, Artemidos Str., 151 25 Maroussi Tel.: +30 210-2709200, Fax: +30 210-2759528 Email: [email protected] www.metka.com
Elemka8, Artemidos Str., 151 25 Maroussi Tel.: +30 210-8117000 Fax: +30 210-8117070 Email: [email protected] www.elemka.gr
ROMANIA
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSANAR-National Agency Romanian Water6, Edgar Quinet Street, 010018, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 312 2174 Email: [email protected] www.rowater.ro
ANRE-National Energy Regulator3, Constantin Nacu Street, 020995, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 327 8174 Email: [email protected] www.anre.ro
Competition Council Romania1, Piata Presei Libere, building D1, 013701, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 318 1198 Email: [email protected] www.consiliulconcurentei.ro
Constanta County Council51, Tomis Avenue, 900725, Constanta Tel.: +4 0241 488 404 Email: [email protected] www.cjc.ro
Environment Protection Agency Constanta23, Unirii Street, Constanta Tel.: +4 024 154 6596 Email: [email protected] apmct.anpm.ro
Mayor of Corbu38, Principala Street, Corbu, Constanta County Tel.: +4 024 176 5100 Email: [email protected] www.primariacorbu.ro
National Agency for Mineral Resources36-38 Mendeleev Str., 010366, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 313 2204 Email: [email protected] www.namr.ro
Nuclear Agency & Radioactive Waste21-25 Mendeleev Str., 010362, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 316 8001 Email: [email protected] www.agentianucleara.ro
Romanian Government1 Victoriei Square, 011791, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 314 3400 Email: [email protected] www.gov.ro
Romanian Ministry of Economy152 Victoriei Avenue, 010096, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 202 5426 Email: [email protected] www.minind.ro
Romanian Ministry of Environment and Climate Changes12 Libertatii Avenue, Sector 5, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 408 9500 Email: [email protected] www.mmediu.ro
Romanian Ministry of Regional Development17 Apolodor Street, North side, Sector 5, Bucharest Tel.: +4 037 211 1409 Email: [email protected] www.mdrap.ro
02. NON GOVERNMENTACUE-Association of Energy Utilities Companies54B, Nordului Road, 014104, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 230 3265 Email: [email protected] www.acue.ro
AFEER-The Association of Electricity Suppliers in Romania7-9, Tudor Stefan Street, 1st floor, ap 2, 011655, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 230 6031 Email: [email protected] www.afeer.ro
APER-Romanian Energy Policy Association13, 13 Septembrie Road, 050711, Sector 5, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 411 9829 Email: [email protected] www.aper.ro
CNR-CME-Romanian National Comitee of World Energy Council1-3, Lacul Tei Avenue, 020371, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 211 4155 Email: [email protected] www.cnr-cme.ro
CRE-Romanian Energy Center16-18, Hristo Botev Ave, 030236, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 303 5741 Email: [email protected] www.crenerg.org
EURISC Romania82-84, Mihai Eminescu Street, B entrance, ap. 19, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 212 2102 Email: [email protected] www.eurisc.org
Foreign Investors Council Romania11, Ion Campineanu Street, 3rd floor, Sector 1, 010031, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 222 1931 Email: [email protected] www.fic.ro
Greenpeace CEE Romania18 Ing. Vasile Cristescu Str., 021985, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 435 5743 Email: [email protected] www.greenpeace.org
Institute for Studies and Hydropower - ISPH SA293 Vitan Road, 031293, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 314 7270 Email: [email protected] www.isph.ro
Petroleum Club of Romania38, Dragos Voda Street, ap. 1, 020747, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 102 0605 Email: [email protected] www.petroleumclub.ro
Romania Energy Center319, Calarasilor Road, 030622, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 432 8737 Email: [email protected] www.roec.ro
76
Romania Photovoltaic Industry Association58-60, Gheorghe Polizu Street, Sector 1, Bucharest Email: [email protected] www.rpia.ro
Romanian Association of Biomass and Biogas (ARBIO)37, Putul lui Zamfir Street, 4th floor, 011684, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 308 6271 Email: [email protected] www.arbio.ro
Romanian Black Sea Titleholders Association169A, Floreasca Road, building A, office 2099, Sector 1, Bucharest
Romanian Electricity Suppliers Association7-9, Tudor Stefan Street, ap. 2, 011655, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 230 6031 Email: [email protected] www.afeer.ro
Romanian Wind Power Association17 C.A. Rosetti Street, office 216, Sector 2, Bucharest Email: con [email protected] www.rwea.ro
03. ENERGY COMPANIESCEZ Romania2B, Ion Ionescu de la Brad Street, 1st floor, 013813, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel: +4 021 269 2566 Email: [email protected] www.cez.ro
E.ON Romania12 Justitiei Street, 540069, Targu Mures, Mures County Tel.: +4 0265 200 366 Email: [email protected] www.eon.com
Electrica Furnizare S.A.1A, Stefan cel Mare Road, 011736, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 208 5999 Email: [email protected] www.electrica.ro
Enel Romania127, Giurgiului Road, 04066, Sector 4, Bucharest www.enel.ro
GDF SUEZ Energy Romania4-6, Marasesti Avenue, 040254, Sector 4, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 301 2000 www.gdfsuez.ro
General Electric Romania169A, Floreasca Street, 014472, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 0372 074 517 Email: [email protected] www.ge.com
Hidroelectrica S.A.15-17, Ion Mihalache Avenue, 011171, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 303 2500 Email: [email protected] www.hidroelectrica.ro
InterAgro1-3, Verii Street, 011971, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 210 3700 Email: [email protected] www.interagro.ro
Monsson Group Romania158, Mamaia Avenue, 900534, Constanta Tel.: +4 0241 550 353 Email: [email protected] www.monsson.eu
Nuclearelectrica S.A.65, Polona Street, 010505, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 203 8200 Email: [email protected] www.nuclearelectrica.ro
Renovatio Trading S.R.L.55, Primaverii Avenue, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 318 2010 Email: [email protected] www.renovatiotrading.ro
Termoelectrica S.A.1-3, Lacul Tei Avenue, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 303 7305 Email: [email protected] www.termoelectrica.ro
Transelectrica2-4, Olteni Street, 030786, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 303 5822 Email: [email protected] www.transelectrica.ro
Verbund Romania31-33, Carol Avenue, Bucharest Tel.: +43 (0)50313-53744 Email: [email protected] www.verbund.com
Vestas Romania11-15, Tipografilor Str., Building B3, 013714 Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 403 3099 Email: [email protected] www.vestas.com
04. OIL & GASAggreko7A, Centura Avenue, Tunari, Ilfov 077180 Tel.: +4 031 405 2208 Email: [email protected] www.aggreko.com
Chevron Romania Exploration and Production3-5, Presei Libere Square, City Gate South Tower, 013702, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 207 6110 www.chevron.ro
Exxon Mobil Romania169A, Floreasca Road, building A, 014472, Sector 1, Bucharest www.exxonmobileurope.com
Gas Plus75-77, Buzesti Street, 7th floor, 011013 Bucharest Email: [email protected] www.gasplus.it
GSP-Petroleum Services Group97, Pipera - Tunari Str., 077190 Voluntari, IIfov Tel.: +4 0372 080 243 Email: [email protected] www.gspoffshore.com
Lukoil Romania6, Elena Vacarescu Str., 020271, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 227 2106 Email: [email protected] www.lukoil.ro
MOL Romania4-6, Daniel Danielopolu Avenue, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 204 8500 www.molromania.ro
OMV Petrom22, Coralilor Str., Petrom City, Sector 1, 013329 Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 402 2201 Email: [email protected] www.petrom.com
Petro Ventures4, Constantin Daniel Street, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 0721 936 235 Email: [email protected]
Petroceltic Ireland3, Ermil Pangratti Street, ap. 4, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +353 1 421 8300 Email: [email protected] www.petroceltic.com
Petrolexportimport SA72, Unirii Avenue, building J3C, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 318 8459 Email: [email protected] www.petex.ro
PetromarConstanta Harbour, Berth 34, 900900, Constanta Tel.: +4 0241 555 255 Email: [email protected]
PETROTEL - LUKOIL S.A.235, Mihai Bravu Street, Ploiesti, Prahova County Tel.: +4 0244 504 000 Email: [email protected] www.lukoil.ro
Romgaz S.A.4, Constantin Motas Square, 551130, Medias, Sibiu County Tel.: +4 0269 201 020 Email: [email protected] www.romgaz.ro
Rompetrol3-5, Presei Libere Square, City Gate Building, Northern Tower, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 303 0800 Email: [email protected] www.rompetrol.ro
Sterling Midia Resources11-13, Andrei Muresanu Str., 011841, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 231 3256 Email: [email protected] www.sterling-resources.com
Upetrom Group Romania97, Pipera-Tunari Str., 077190, Voluntari, Ilfov County Tel.: +4 021 308 0200 Email: [email protected] www.upetrom.com
05. GAS dISTRIBUTIONDistrigaz Sud Retele S.R.L.4-6, Marasesti Avenue, 040254, Sector 4, Bucharest www.distrigazsud-retele.ro
Transgaz1, Constantin Motas Square, 551130 Medias, Sibiu County Tel.: +4 0269 803 333 Email: [email protected] www.transgaz.ro
77
06. COALOltenia Energetical Complex5, Alexandru Ioan Cuza Str.Targu Jiu, Gorj County Tel.: +4 0253 205 401 Email: [email protected] www.ceoltenia.ro
Romanian National Coal Company S.A.2, Timisoara Str., 332015 Petrosani, Hunedoara County Tel.: +4 0254 506 100 Email: [email protected] www.cnh.ro
07. EqUIPMENT ANd MAINTENANCEABB S.R.L.169A, Floreasca Road, building A1, 014459, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 0372 158 200 www.abb.com.ro
Adrem Invest20A, Aleea Alexandru, 011823, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 233 5920 www.adrem.ro
Alstom Romania63-69, Iacob Felix Street, Premium Plaza building, 12 floor, 011033, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 306 9500 www.alstom.com/alstom-worldwide
Ansaldo Nucleare SPA - Romania65, Dacia Avenue, ap. 2, 010405, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 211 3991 Email: [email protected] www.ansaldonucleare.it
CONDMAG S.A.52, Avram Iancu Street, 500075, Brasov Tel.: +4 0268 414 954 Email: [email protected] www.condmag.ro
Egnatia Rom65, Sf. Maria Street, 011495, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 208 2934 Email: [email protected] www.egnatia-rom.ro
Energheia Group Romania SRL34, IC Bratianu Avenue, 6th floor, ap.16, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 432 9031 Email: [email protected] www.energheiagroup.it
ICME ECAB SA 42, Drumul intre Tarlale Street, 032982, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 209 0111 Email: [email protected] www.cablel.ro
Luxten76, Parang Street, 012328, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 668 8819 Email: [email protected] www.luxten.com
RIG Service SA18, Marc Aureliu Street, nr. 18, 900744, Constanta Tel.: +4 0241 586 406 Email: [email protected] www.rig-service.com
Romenergo242-246, Floreasca Road, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 233 0771 Email: [email protected] www.romenergo.ro
Schneider Electric Romania11, Dinu Vintila Street, Euro Tower, 1st floor, 021101, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 203 0606 Email: [email protected] www.schneider-electric.ro
Siemens Romania24, Preciziei Street, West Gate Park, Building H3, 062204, Sector 6, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 629 6400 Email: [email protected] www.cee.siemens.com
Smart Solar30, A. S. Puskin Street, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: + 4 0758 110 110 Email: [email protected] www.smart-solar.eu
TIAB S.A.17, Pictor Verona Street, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 302 1230 Email: [email protected] www.tiab.ro
08. LAW FIRMSBiris Goran77, Emanoil Porumbaru Street, 011424, Sector 1,Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 260 0710 Email: [email protected] www.birisgoran.ro
Bostina si asociatii70, Jean Louis Calderon Street, 020039, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 319 4466 Email: [email protected] www.bostinalawyers.eu
Bulboaca si Asociatii31, Vasile Lascar Str., 020492, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 408 8900 Email: [email protected] www.bulboaca.com
Clifford Chance Badea28-30, Academiei Str., 010016, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 666 6100 Email: [email protected] www.cliffordchance.com/people_and_places/places/europe/romania.html#
CMS Cameron McKenna211-15, Tipografilor Str., B3-B4, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 407 3800 Email: [email protected] www.cms-cmck.com
Dentons28C, C. Budisteanu Str., 010775, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 312 4950 Email: [email protected] www.dentons.com
DLA Piper89-97, Grigore Alexandrescu Street, East Wing, 1st Floor, 010624, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 0372 155 800 Email: [email protected] www.dlapiper.com
IK Rokas&Partners45, Polona Street, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 411 7405 Email: [email protected] www.rokas.com
Kinstellar Romania8-10, Nicolae Iorga Str., 010434, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 307 1619 Email: [email protected] www.kinstellar.com
Musat & Associates43, Aviatorilor Avenue, 011853, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 202 5900 Email: [email protected] www.musat.ro
NNDKP1A, Bucharest-Ploiesti Road, Entrance A, 013681, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 201 1200 Email: [email protected] www.nndkp.ro
PeliFilip169A, Calea Floreasca Road, Building B, 014459, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 527 2000 Email: [email protected] www.pelifilip.com
Popovici, Nitu & Associates239, Dorobanti Road, 010567, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 317 7919 Email: [email protected] www.pnpartners.ro
RTPR Allen&Overy15, Charles de Gaulle Square, nr. 15, 011857, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 405 7777 Email: [email protected] www.allenovery.com
Schoenherr & Associates30, Dacia Avenue, 010413, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 319 6790 Email: [email protected] www.schoenherr.eu
Serban&Musneci Associates54, Mircea Zorileanu Str., Sector 1, 012056 Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 222 4478 Email: [email protected] www.serbanmusneci.ro
Tuca Zbarcea & Associates4-8, Nicolae Titulescu Avenue, America House, West Wing, 011141, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 204 8890 Email: [email protected] www.tuca.ro
Voicu si Filipescu26-28, Stirbei Voda Str., 010113, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 314 0200 Email: [email protected] www.voicufilipescu.ro
Wolf Theiss58-60, Gheorghe Polizu Str., 011062, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 308 8100 Email: [email protected] www.wolftheiss.com
09. EdUCATION INSTITUTESOil&Gas University Ploiesti39, Bucuresti Ave., 100680, Ploiesti, Prahova County Tel.: +4 0244 573 171 Email: [email protected] www.upg-ploiesti.ro
Romanian Academy125, Victoriei Road, 010071, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 212 8651 Email: [email protected] www.acad.ro
Valahia University18-20, Unirii Av., 130082, Targoviste, Dambovita County Tel.: +4 0245 206 101 Email: [email protected] www.valahia.ro
78
10. PR COMPANIESAction Pr35 Alexandru Constantinescu Str., Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 224 2270 Email: [email protected] www.actionprgroup.com
Aegis Media Central Services (AMCS)11, Grigore Mora Str., 011885,Sector 1, Bucharest Email: [email protected] www.aemedia.com
AMICOM39, Louis Pasteur Str., 050534, Sector 5, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 228 4437 www.amicom.ro
Centrade Saatchi & Saatchi133, Serban Voda Street, building D+E, 040205, Sector 4, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 730 0600 Email: [email protected] www.saatchi.com
GMP PR4, Teodor Stefanescu Street, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 212 1992 Email: [email protected] www.gmp.ro
GolinHarris17, Ceasornicului Str., 014111, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 301 0051 Email: [email protected] www.golinharris.ro
Grayling PR9, Maltopol Street, 011047, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 335 5547 Email: [email protected] www.grayling.com
Media Investment3, Praga Street, 011801, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 206 2200 Email: [email protected] www.mediainvestment.ro
OMD55, Floreasca Road, Grand Offices Building, 014453, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 222 1091 Email: [email protected] www.omd.com
Pi231, Primaverii Avenue, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 232 0325 Email: [email protected] www.pi2.ro
Premium PR23, Eroilor Sanitari Av., 050471, Sector 5, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 411 0152 Email: [email protected] www.premiumpr.ro
The Group3, Praga Street, 011801, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 206 2200 Email: [email protected] www.thegroup.ro
Total PR68, Basarabia Avenue, 4th floor, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 437 0110 Email: [email protected] www.totalpr.ro
V+O Communication40, Hristache Pitarul Str., 011626, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 231 9195 Email: [email protected] www.vando.ro
11. EMBASSIESCanadian Embassy in Romania1-3, Tuberozelor Street, 011411, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 307 5000 Email: [email protected] www.canadainternational.gc.ca/romania-roumanie
Greek Embassy in Romania-Commercial Office1-3, Pache Protopopescu Avenue, 021403, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 210 0748 Email: [email protected] www.mfa.gr/bucharest
United Arab Emirates Embassy in Romania4, Modrogan Alley, 011826, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 231 7676 Email: [email protected] www.uae-embassy.ae
USA Embassy in Romania4-6, Dr. Liviu Librescu Str., 015118, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 200 3300 Email: [email protected] romania.usembassy.gov
12. BANKSBanca Romaneasca11 Dinu Vintila Street, Euro Tower Building, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 305 9000 Email: [email protected] www.banca-romaneasca.ro
Erste Group Banca Comerciala Romana5, Regina Elisabeta Ave, 030016, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 407 4200 Email: [email protected] www.bcr.ro
ING Bank Romania48, Iancu de Hunedoara Ave, 011745, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 222 1600 Email: [email protected] www.ing.ro
International Finance Corporation (IFC)31, Vasile Lascar Street, UTI building, 020491, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 201 0311 Email: [email protected] www.ifc.org
Piraeus Bank Romania34-36, Carol I Avenue, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 303 6969 Email: [email protected] www.piraeusbank.ro
Raiffeisen Bank S.A.246C, Calea Floreasca Road, Sky Tower, 014476, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 306 3002 Email: [email protected] www.raiffeisen.ro
Romanian International Bank67, Unirii Avenue, Building G2A, Section 1 & 2, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 318 9515 Email: [email protected] www.roib.ro
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)56-60, Iancu de Hunedoara Avenue, Metropolis Center, West Wing, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 202 7100 www.ebrd.com
The European Investment Bank (EIB)31, Vasile Lascar Str., 020492, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 208 6400 Email: [email protected] www.eib.org
13. INVESTORSCapital Partners56, Dacia Avenue, 010407, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 031 225 1000 Email: [email protected] www.capitalpartners.ro
Enterprise Investors36, Stirbei Boda Str., Domus Cntr, 010113 Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 314 6685 Email: [email protected] www.ei.com.pl
Maison Economique - Ubifrance- Roumanie11, Nicolae Lorga Street, 010432, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 305 6780 Email: [email protected] www.ubifrance.com
14. AUdITDeloitte Romania4-8, Nicolae Titulescu Road, Est entrance, 0111141, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 222 1661 www.deloitte.com
Ernst & Young63-69, lacob Felix Street, Premium Plaza, 011033, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 402 4000 Email: [email protected] www.ey.com
KPMG69-71, Bucharest-Ploiesti Road, Victoria Business Park DN1, 013685, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 0372 377 800 Email: [email protected] www.kpmg.com
15. FUEL ANd LUBRICANTSENI Romania S.R.L.169A Floreasca Road, Building A, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 0316 206 300 www.eni.com
16. CHAMBERS OF COMMERCEBucharest Chamber of Commerce and Industry CCIB2, Octavian Goga Avenue, 030982, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 319 0114 Email: [email protected] www.ccir.ro
Constanta Chamber of Commerce185A, Alex. Lapusneanu Ave, 900457, Constanta Tel.: +4 024 161 9854 Email: [email protected] www.ccina.ro
79
Romania-France Chamber of Commerce21, Poet Andrei Muresanu Street, 011841, Sector 1, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 317 1062 Email: [email protected] www.ccifer.ro
17. IMFInternational Monetary Fund7, Halelor Street, 030118, Sector 3, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 311 5833 Email: [email protected] www.fmi.ro
18. ENERGY TRAdERSFreepoint Commodities157-197 Buckingham Palace Road, SW1W 9SP, London, UK Tel.: +44 (0)203 262 6000 Email: [email protected] www.freepoint.com
Grivco SA1B, Garlei Str., Grivco Building, 013721, Bucharest Tel.: +4 021 301 9700 Email: [email protected] www.grivco.ro
18. CONSULTANTSISPE-Institute for Studies and Power Engineering1-3, Lacul Tei Avenue, 20371, Sector 2, Bucharest Tel.: +4 037 282 1076 Email: [email protected] www.ispe.ro
SERBIA
01. GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSAgency for Environmental Protection27a Ruze Jovanovica, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 2861 065 Fax: +381 11 2861 077 Email: [email protected] www.sepa.gov.rs
Commission for Protection of Competition7 Kneginje Zorke Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 381 1911 Fax: +381 11 381 1936 Email: [email protected] www.kzk.org.rs
Energy Agency of the Republic of Serbia5 / V Terazije Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3033 829, Fax: +381 11 3225 780 Email: [email protected] www.aers.rs
European Integration Office34 Nemanjina Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3061-100, 3061-102, 3061-103 Fax: +381 11 3061-110 Email: [email protected] www.seio.gov.rs
Ministry of Agriculture and Environmental Protection22-26 Nemanjina Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 260-79-60, +381 11 3612-197 Fax: +381 11 260-79-61 Email: [email protected] www.mpt.gov.rs
Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure22-26 Nemanjina Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3614-652 Fax: +381 11 3616- 521 Email: [email protected] www.ms.gov.rs
Ministry of EconomyKneza Milosa 20, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3642-600 Fax: +381 11 3642-705 Email: [email protected] www.privreda.gov.rs
Ministry of Mining and Energy22-26 Nemanjina Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3604-403 Fax: +381 11 3616-603 Email: [email protected] www.merz.gov.rs
Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government10 Vlajkoviceva Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 333-4105 Fax: +381 11 333-4181 Email: [email protected] www.mrrls.gov.rs
02. NON GOVERNMENTALDSW - Deutsch-Serbische Wirtschaftsvereinigung / German-Serbian Business Association19-21 Toplicin venac, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 2028 010 Fax: +381 11 3034 780 Email: [email protected] http://serbien.ahk.rs
Foreign Investors Council 47 / IV Jevremova Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3281 958 Email: [email protected] www.fic.org.rs
National Alliance for Local Economic Development – NALED30 / VII Makedonska Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 337 3063 Fax: +381 11 337 3061 Email: [email protected] www.naled-serbia.org
Serbian Chamber of Commerce13-15, Resavska Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3300 900 Fax: +381 11 3230 949 Email: [email protected] www.pks.rs
Serbian Environment Energy Centre (SEEC)48, Vojvode Stepe Street, Obrenovac Tel: +381 69 10 19 488 Email: [email protected]
Serbian Wind Energy Association (SEWEA)6, Dure Jaksica Street, Belgrade www.sewea.rs
03. ENERGY COMPANIESCentar7, Slobode Street, Kragujevac Tel: + 381 34 37 00 83, Fax: + 381 34 37 01 56 Email: [email protected] www.edcentar.com
Drinsko-Limske Hidroelektrane1, Trg Dusana Jerkovica Street, Bajina Basta Tel: + 381 31 8636 59, Fax: + 381 31 8643 54 Email: [email protected] www.dlhe.rs
Elektromreza Srbije11, Kneza Milosa Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3330 700, Fax: + 381 11 32 39 908 Email: [email protected] www.ems.rs
Elektrovojvodina100, Oslobodenja Boulevard, Novi Sad Tel: + 381 21 527 030, Fax: + 381 21 422 847 Email: [email protected] www.elektrovojvodina.rs
Elektrodistribucija Beograd1-3, Masarikova Street, Belgrade Tel: + 381 11 3616 706, Fax: + 381 11 3616 641 Email: [email protected] www.edb.rs
Elektrosrbija5, Dimitrija Tucovica Street, Kraljevo Tel: + 381 36 3 21 686, Fax: + 381 36 3 21 958 Email: [email protected] www.elektrosrbija.rs
EPS Obnovljivi Izvori2, Carice Milice Street, Belgrade Tel: + 381 11 2024 828, Fax: + 381 11 2629 489 Email: [email protected] www.eps.rs
EPS Snabdevanje2, Carice Milice Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 6556 747 Fax: + 381 11 655 6757 Email: [email protected] www.eps-snabdevanje.rs
Hidroelektrane Derdap1, Trg kralja Petra Street, Kladovo Tel: + 381 19 801 651, Fax: + 381 19 801 659 Email: [email protected] www.djerdap.rs
HIP Petrohemija82, Spoljnostarcevacka Street, Pancevo Tel: +381 13 307 000, Fax: +381 13 310 207 Email: [email protected] www.hip-petrohemija.rs
JP Srbijagas12, Narodnog fronta Street, Novi Sad Tel: +381 21 481 2703, Fax: +381 21 481 1305 Email: [email protected] www.srbijagas.com
80
Jugoistok46a, Zorana Dindica Boulevard, Nis Tel: + 381 18 51 85 00 Fax: + 381 18 53 33 15 Email: [email protected] www.jugoistok.com
NIS a.d. Novi Sad (Petroleum Industry of Serbia)12, Narodnog fronta Street, Novi Sad Email: [email protected] www.nis.eu
Panonske Te-To100, Oslobodenja Boulevard, Novi Sad Tel: + 381 21 527 785 Fax: + 381 21 661 49 44 Email: [email protected] www.panonske.rs
Rudarski Basen Kolubara1, Svetog Save Street, Lazarevac Tel: + 381 11 8123 130 Fax: + 381 11 8123 210 Email: [email protected] www.rbkolubara.co.rs
South Stream12, Narodnog Fronta Street, Novi Sad Tel: +381 21 210 1323 www.south-stream.info/
Termoelektrane Nikola TeslaBogoljuba Urosevica Crnog, Obrenovac Tel: + 381 11 2054 501 Fax: + 381 11 8755 500 Email: [email protected] www.tent.rs
Termoelektrane I Kopovi Kostolac5-7, Nikole Tesle Street, Kostolac Tel: + 381 12 5388 01, Fax: + 381 12 5387 11 Email: [email protected] www.te-ko.rs
04. ALTERNATIVE ENERGYContinental Wind Serbia23, Resavska Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 785 0020 Email: [email protected] www.continentalwind.com
Electrawinds-S6, Vladimira Popovica Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 660 0955 www.electrawinds.be
Energo Green115E, Mihajla Pupino Boulevard, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 353 9522 Email: [email protected] www.energogreen.com
NIS Energowind115v, Mihajla Pupina Boulevard, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 301 5000 Email: [email protected] www.nis-energowind.com
Solaris Energy42, Kralja Aleksandra Street, Kladovo Tel: +381 (11) 24 64 580 Email: [email protected]
Vestas Central Europe 6, Mihaila Pupina Boulevard, Belgrade Tel: +49 4841 971 722 www.vestas.com
WindVision Operations18-20 / VII Obilicev venac Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 328 3527 Fax: +381 11 630 1527 www.windvision.com
05. LAW FIRMSIKRP i partneri d.o.o. Beograd30, Tadeusa Koscuskog, 11000 Belgrade Tel.: +381 11 2635184, Fax: +381 11 2638349 E-mail: [email protected] www.rokas.com/en/
Karanovic & Nikolic23, Resavska Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 3094 200, Fax: +381 11 3094 223 Email: [email protected] www.karanovic-nikolic.com
Moravcevic Vojnovic i Partneri in cooperation with Schoenherr27, Francuska Street, Belgrade Tel: +381 11 32 02 600 Fax: +381 11 32 02 610 www.schoenherr.rs
Petrikic & Partneri in cooperation with CMS Reich-Rohrwig Hainz3, Cincar Janka Street, Belgrade Tel.: +381 11 3208900, Fax: +381 11 3208930 Email: [email protected] www.cms-rrh.com/Belgrade-Serbia
TURKEY
01. ELECTRICITYPPC Elektrik Tedarik ve Ticaret Anonim SirketiMaslak Mah., Bilim Sk., No:5 Sun Plaza, Kat:13, 34398, Maslak, Istanbul Tel.: +90 212 367 4963, Fax: +90 212 366 5802 Email: [email protected]
