From Dynamic Cost Comparison (DCC) to cost-recovery assessment DCC Prime cost: the missing performance indicator

Transcription

1 Water Investing Today for the Future Ninth EWA Brussels Conference 13th 14th November 2013, Brussels, Belgium From Dynamic Cost Comparison (DCC) to cost-recovery assessment DCC Prime cost: the missing performance indicator Károly Kovács Vice-president European Water Association

2 Topics Full cost-recovery according to the EU WFD New investments, option analysis, least cost solutions Real value of the infrastructure Effect of implementing infrastructure cost recovery Potential indicator for Full cost-recovery

3 Full cost-recovery (FCR) Water Framework Directive (WFD): 2000/60/EC Art.9.: 1. Member States shall take account of the principle of recovery of the cost of water services, including environmental and resource cost, having regard to the economic analysis conducted according to Annex III, and in accordance in particular with the polluter pays principle. several questions arise about practical application of the FCR principle (what, who, when, how ) divers methodological approaches in the member states incomparable, controversial results no commonly accepted performance indicator ongoing professional scientific discussion in the EU

4 EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL ENVIRONMENT Directorate C Quality of Life, Water & Air ENV.C.1 - Water Questions: "Linking Water Management and WFD objectives" What is stopping us putting a 'true value' on water services? What are the main reasons why economic and ecological perspectives have not been fully integrated in river basin planning? How could the European Commission support the development of more consistent methodologies in order to better integrate economic and ecological perspectives into water management

5 Exactly what costs should be fully recovered? most answers are theoretic major part cannot be expressed in monetary terms non measurable not objective affordability?

6 EEA Cost recovery Report: Table 14 : Cost recovery levels Country Cost recovery levels Year Netherlands 99% (figure including all sectors, i.e. domestic and business users including farmers) 2010 France O&M costs: 100% Arcadis, 2012 Investment costs: % (Average: 55%) Spain (Guadalquivir RBD) 49,78% 2005 Cyprus 51% Arcadis, 2012 Greece 54% Arcadis, 2012 Italy % (South) % (North) Average: 50% Arcadis, 2012 Source: Assessment of full cost recovery pricing of water A project under the Framework contract Ref. No. EEA/IEA/09/002 Lot 3 Task 2 Interim Report commissioned by the European Environment Agency, December 2012

7 Table 12 Time changes in reported expenditures (as % of total expenditures) for selected water utilities BWB (DE) Operating expenditure 62% 61% 61% 62% 62% Env. Charges and taxes 9% 8% 8% 8% 8% Capital expenditure 30% 31% 31% 30% 30% BMO (FR) Operating expenditure 45% 41% 43% 51% Capital expenditure 55% 59% 57% 49% City of Operating expenditure 51% 47% 54% 55% 45% Barcelona (ES) Capital expenditure 23% 23% 18% 17% 29% Env. Charges and taxes 26% 30% 28% 28% 25% Vitens (NL) Operating expenditure 58% 58% 57% 58% Env. Charges and taxes 20% 20% 20% 19% Capital expenditure 22% 22% 23% 23% BW (UK) Operating expenditure 72% 69% 69% 70% 70% 71% 64% 61% Capital expenditure 28% 31% 31% 30% 30% 29% 36% 39% SW (SCT) Operating expenditure 46% 49% 47% 46% 46% 45% Capital expenditure 54% 51% 53% 54% 54% 55% Source: Assessment of full cost recovery pricing of water A project under the Framework contract Ref. No. EEA/IEA/09/002 Lot 3 Task 2 Interim Report commissioned by the European Environment Agency, December 2012

8 ???

9 Investments in wastewater pipes (infrastructure) Source: Waterwatch ( Company Total length of pipes in km Renewed or substituted pipes of these From 1990 to 1999, in km Functional duration Years expected Anglian Dwr Cymru North West Northumbrian Severn Trent South West Southern Thames Wessex Yorkshire Total/All

10 Real renewal and reconstruction ratio of water infrastructure Proportion of reconstruction funds in water/wastewater tariffs: (amortization of utility assets/revenue from tariffs): Hungary: <11% Germany: 45% Switzerland: 69% Reconstruction ratio of networks and calculated period of full renewal (network reconstruction/lenght of network/year): Switzerland: 1,9-1,0% years Germany: 1,0% 100 years Hungary: 0,4-0,2% years

11 Water investments in the CEE region Total investments: ~ 8 billion ~ 660 projects Available EU funds programming period, million EUR Romania: Slovakia: Number of projects Romania: 170 Bulgaria: 120 Hungary: Croatia: 695 Bulgaria: Hungary: 223 Croatia: increasing need for reconstruction Source: International Conference on the Development and maintenance of water infrastructure in the CEE region with EU financing, organized by Hungarian Wastewater Association and EWA, 6 th April 2011, Budapest, Summarized data provided by lecturers

12 Current EU tendering procedures Main method of project preparation: Cost-benefit analysis (CBA): methodological guidance in line with WFD, but no detailed guidance on option analysis in practice, short term financial interests are contradicting WFD principles (sustainability, full cost-recovery etc.) short term financial approach sustainability, full cost-recovery EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Directorate General Regional Policy (July 2008): Guide to Cost-benefit Analysis of Investment Projects (EU Guidelines)

13 The DCC project Dynamic Cost Comparison Calculation (DCC) for selecting least-cost projects in water supply and wastewater disposal Goal: Improvement of the planning process of water investments in order to ensure sustainability and cost-efficiency 4+1 CEE countries + Germany In line with EU (EBRD/EC) requirements, Transfer of common knowledge Adoptation to local circumstances

14 ability to influence costs Saving potential during the planning process 100% Conceptual plans, option analyses, feasibility study Permission Tender design Tendering, implementation, max. ±10% time

15 The method of Dynamic Cost Comparison Calculations (DCC) A1: Gravity sewerage system EUR EUR/a time (a) EUR A2: Pressure sewerage system EUR/a EUR time (a) Main characteristics of DCC: Full life cycle approach Dynamic approach Real term thinking Interdisciplinary approach Schematization of the calculation process In line with national and EU regulations Considers all cost! (inv., repl., O&M, res., env.) Proper application of DCC in option analysis: leads to the selection of the most cost-effective, optimum solution! sustainability principle prevails throughout the whole decesion-making process!

16 Real value loss of assets Book value (Depreciation, 2%) Real value of assets (HU) Real value of assets (3%) Real value of assets (5%) Inflationary impact (HU) Inflationary impact (3%) Inflationary impact (5%) Hungary ( ) cum. inf.: 1200%! 10 0

17 Effect of implementing infrastructure cost recovery Cost structure optimalization 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 7.0% 25.0% 10.0% 16.0% 5.0% 16.0% 4.0% 25.1% 20.0% 6.7% 12.8% 4.0% 12.8% 2.0% 10% 16.2% 16.2% 0% Current cost structure (HU) Optimized cost structure Independent costs* Corporate income tax Purchased water - Transferred wastewater Troubleshooting Amortization Profit after tax General and administrative expenses Energy Maintenance

18 Exactly what costs should be fully recovered? DCC method defines cost as real consumption of resources, goods and services. DCC considers all costs emerging during the whole life cycle: investment cost Cost structure replacement cost O&M cost (resource costs, internalized external costs included) life span therefore DCC Prime cost represents exactly what should be fully recovered by definition.

19 How to assess full cost-recovery? What is FCR? In short: All cost = All revenues, but lots of questions arise about the practical application DCCC: the potential methodology for the assessment of cost-recovery level DCCC Prime cost: the potential performance indicator specific revenue (tariff): 1,3 /m 3 DCCC Prime cost: 1,3 /m 3 = 100% cost recovery

20 Recomendations Improve the project preparation by implementing DCC in option analysis Actualise the value the existing infrastructure Focus on the sustainability of the infrastructure Introduce DCC Prime Cost as indicator for full cost-recovery

21 Water Investing Today for the Future Ninth EWA Brussels Conference 13th 14th November 2013, Brussels, Belgium Thank you for your kind attention! Károly Kovács EWA Vice-president

22 Full cost recovery and DCC Report on the Assessment of full cost recovery pricing of water, December 2012, commissioned by the European Environment Agency (EEA): detailed, high quality study, but no methodology provided Additional remarks on the report by EWA: DCC recommended as a potential methodology for the measurement of full cost recovery Because: approach of DCC is in line with WDF Present value of project costs (PVPC) calculated by DCC = what should be recovered in total /m Dynamic prime cost (DPC) calculated by DCC = 3 what should be recovered by specific tariffs