Ettevalmistustoetuse taotlemine - FuelWave

5873115 428625 0 0 -3810 9724390 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL Ehitajate tee 5 19086 Tallinn Rg-kood 74000323 Tel 620 2002 E-post [email protected] www.taltech.ee 0 0 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL Ehitajate tee 5 19086 Tallinn Rg-kood 74000323 Tel 620 2002 E-post [email protected] www.taltech.ee -3810 428625 0 0 Sihtasutus Eesti Teadusagentuur Soola 8 0 6 . 0 3 .202 6 nr 11-10/48- 7 51004 Tartu Ettevalmistustoetuse taotlemine Käesolevaga taotleb Tallinna Tehnikaülikool ( reg nr 74000323, ak EE201010052037382001 ) ettevalmistustoetust projektile Accelerating the Uptake of Renewable and Low-Carbon Fuels in the EU Waterborne Transport Ecosystem – Fuelwave ( 101270355 , HORIZON-CL5-2025-04 ), vastutav täitja Ulla Pirita Tapaninen, Eesti Mereakadeemia. Lugupidamisega (allkirjastatud digitaalselt) Marika Lunden Teadusosakond Lisa: hindamisleht left 284480 Riina Vilgats 620 3536 [email protected] 0 0 Riina Vilgats 620 3536 [email protected] Associated with document Ref. Ares(2025)11057674 - 12/12/2025 Proposal Evaluation Form EUROPEAN COMMISSION Evaluation Summary Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Report - Coordination and support actions Call: HORIZON-CL5-2025-04 Type of action: HORIZON-CSA Proposal number: 101270355 Proposal acronym: FuelWave Duration (months): 36 Proposal title: Accelerating the Uptake of Renewable and Low-Carbon Fuels in the EU Waterborne Transport Ecosystem Activity: HORIZON-CL5-2025-04-D5-16 N. Proposer name Country Total % Grant % eligible Requested costs 1 TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 392,062.5 19.65% 392,062.5 19.65% 2 AMERICAN MPIRO OF SIPING HELLENIC MONOPROSOPI EL 272,187.5 13.64% 272,187.5 13.64% ETAIREIA PERIORISMENIS EVTHINIS 3 FOUNDATION WEGEMT - A EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION NL 207,532.38 10.40% 207,532.38 10.40% OF UNIVERSITIES IN MARINE TECHNOLOGY AND RELATED SCIENCES 4 RISE RESEARCH INSTITUTES OF SWEDEN AB SE 276,375 13.85% 276,375 13.85% 5 FUNDACION DE LA COMUNIDAD VALENCIANA PARA ES 262,375 13.15% 262,375 13.15% LA INVESTIGACION, PROMOCION Y ESTUDIOS COMERCIALES DE VALENCIAPORT 6 ANROMIND OU EE 170,516.09 8.54% 170,516.09 8.54% 7 ETHNICON METSOVION POLYTECHNION EL 258,937.5 12.98% 258,937.5 12.98% 8 IST-ID ASSOCIACAO DO INSTITUTO SUPERIOR TECNICO PT 155,650 7.80% 155,650 7.80% PARA A INVESTIGACAO E O DESENVOLVIMENTO Total: 1,995,635.97 1,995,635.97 Abstract: The decarbonisation of the waterborne transport sector is essential to Europe’s climate neutrality goals. Yet, maritime fuel production is one of the most challenging segments to decarbonise due to high costs, fragmented infrastructure, investor risk, and uncertainty in fuel demand and availability. Despite ongoing innovation and regulation, the uptake of renewable and low-carbon fuels (RLCFs) is progressing too slowly to meet milestones under FuelEU Maritime, RED III, the EU ETS, and AFIR. FuelWave addresses these challenges with a systemic support action to improve the investment readiness and bankability of maritime RLCF projects in port ecosystems. It is aligned with the RLCF Alliance goals, while bringing maritime expertise and understanding of sector-specific challenges. The project tackles gaps in data availability, project development capacity, and funding access by providing targeted assistance to project promoters and aligning them with the most relevant financial mechanisms. The project is structured around four pillars: (1) mapping and analysis of the maritime RLCF ecosystem; (2) tailored advisory support to 20+ high- potential projects selected via transparent criteria and KPIs; (3) co-development of a financial modelling and risk assessment tool embedding RLCF Alliance Bankability Guide while integrating regulatory and maritime project-specific variables; and (4) capacity-building and dissemination to ensure knowledge transfer, skills development, and results uptake. The consortium unites leading maritime innovation actors from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, combining strong regional coverage with deep sectoral expertise. Already supported by Waterborne TP, the Blue Sky Maritime Coalition, and several developers from the RLCF Alliance pipeline and beyond, the FuelWave will work to ensure an increase in bankable maritime RLCF projects entering funding pipelines, accelerating RLCF deployment in EU ports and reinforcing Europe’s leadership in the sector. 101270355/FuelWave-12/12/2025-10:33:01 1/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2025)11057674 - 12/12/2025 Evaluation Summary Report Evaluation Result Total score: 12.50 (Threshold: 10 ) Criterion 1 - Excellence Score: 4.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Clarity and pertinence of the project’s objectives. - Quality of the proposed coordination and/or support measures including soundness of methodology. The clarity and pertinence of the proposed project’s objectives are very good. The objectives are clear, measurable and verifiable. It is positive that the objectives are quantified via Key Achievement Indicators (KAIs), covering ecosystem understanding, pipeline support, tool development and capacity building activities. However, the specific KAI target for the capacity building and knowledge dissemination (Objective 4) is not sufficiently ambitious (e.g., limited to 3 workshops, 3 webinars, 60 stakeholders in total). This is a shortcoming. In general, the proposal addresses well the 3 aspects of the scope of the topic (Support to 20 proposals; analytical financial tool; collaboration with RCLF). However, while collaboration with Global Gateway/Blue Sky is appropriately foreseen, this is not sufficiently described in the proposal. This is a shortcoming. The quality of the proposed coordination and support measures, including the methodology, is very good. The proposed coordination and support measures are appropriate and convincing. The methodology is effective to reach the expected objectives. The methodology proposed for the first aspect of the scope (competitive support to at least 20 proposals) is very good. The framework is well presented as a structured and effective method to assess projects and identify the high-potential ones. It is positive that the selection framework for the RLCF projects to be supported is based on Key Performance Areas (KPA), Key Performance Objectives (KPO), and Key Performance Indicators (KPI). The methodology proposed for the second aspect of the scope (analytical financial tool) is very good. It is positive that the proposed financial tool development plan is policy-aware and risk-centred. The methodology outlined for the third aspect of the scope (to conduct workshops/trainings with financiers and waterborne stakeholders) is outlined. However, the engagement of stakeholders (e.g., 2-3 focus groups) is modest and the way this will be done is not sufficiently detailed and convincing. This is a shortcoming. The underlying concept including models and assumptions is credible and convincing. The main challenges in the chosen methodology are too briefly addressed and are generic. This is a shortcoming. Open science practices are appropriately implemented in line with the FAIR guiding principles. It is positive that Open Science in the project extends beyond data sharing to co-creation with stakeholders, such as port authorities and fuel producers. Criterion 2 - Impact Score: 4.00 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts specified in the work programme, and the likely scale and significance of the contributions due to the project. - Suitability and quality of the measures to maximise expected outcomes and impacts, as set out in the dissemination and exploitation plan, including communication activities. The credibility of the pathways and the contributions from the proposal to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts are very good. The proposal appropriately and credibly addresses all the expected outcomes specified in the work programme. Sufficient justification of how they will be achieved is presented. The proposed project’s contribution to the expected outcomes are significant in principle. However, the baselines are not sufficiently defined which makes the full assessment of the projects contribution difficult. This is a shortcoming. The pathways to achieve the expected impacts are credible. Potential barriers are well identified (e.g., regulatory environment, market dynamics and infrastructure readiness). However, mitigation measures presented are too generic (e.g., barrier related to “availability of complementary funding” does not provide specific mitigation measures related to private funding). This is a shortcoming. The suitability and quality of the communication, dissemination and exploitation measures to maximise expected outcomes and impacts are very good. The communication and dissemination measures are relevant and proportionate to the scale and ambition of the proposed project. Measures include: website, social media presence, stakeholder-facing events including Living Lab workshops, investor/financer notes and technical briefs. The measures are sufficiently tailored to the needs of the relevant target groups. The exploitation measures are relevant and proportionate to the scale and ambition of the proposed project. The measures are sufficiently tailored to the needs of the relevant target groups. The strategy for the management of intellectual property rights is not sufficiently defined beyond a plan to include open-source elements in the tool. This is a shortcoming. The proposal presents credible measures to provide meaningful feedback to policy briefs via policy-makers and standardisation bodies. It is positive that the proposal foresees a structured policy/regulatory gap analysis (D2.3) with actionable checklists planned and outputs intended to inform project multipliers (e.g., maritime associations, international organisations). 101270355/FuelWave-12/12/2025-10:33:01 2/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2025)11057674 - 12/12/2025 Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation Score: 4.50 (Threshold: 3 / 5.00 , Weight: - ) The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the description in the work programme: - Quality and effectiveness of the work plan, assessment of risks, and appropriateness of the effort assigned to work packages, and the resources overall. - Capacity and role of each participant, and extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise. The quality and efficiency of the work plan and the appropriateness of resources overall are very good. The work packages are very well described and proportionate to the scale and complexity of the proposed project. The work package structure is coherent and clearly maps activities to objectives and outputs. The timing of work packages and tasks, as well as their interrelations, is very well addressed. Milestones and deliverables are well structured and appropriately timed to support monitoring of the project’s progress. The dissemination level of deliverables is sufficiently justified. In general the resources and effort allocated to work packages are well in line with their objectives and deliverables. However, the time allocated to individual project support is low (Task 3.4 - 10 hours one-to-one support allocated to each project) to support 20 submission ready proposals, and this is not sufficiently justified. This is a shortcoming. Relevant risks related to the proposed project implementation and their associated mitigation measures are well identified. The likelihood of occurrence and severity of these risks are well outlined. The capacity and role of each participant, and the extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise are very good. The consortium partners bring together most of the necessary expertise and knowledge to carry out the proposed work. However, the finance sector is not sufficiently represented. This is a shortcoming. The consortium members have appropriate complementarity, with a diverse range of entities involved in the project (i.e., research institutes, universities, industry). It is positive that the consortium have secured letters of intent from three members of the RLCF Alliance, who are fuel producers. The overlaps between partners and their competences are well justified. All partners have a valid role and adequate resources to fulfil that role. Scope of the application Status: Yes Comments (in case the proposal is out of scope) Not provided Exceptional funding Except when explicitly allowed in the topic, any entity from a non-associated third country and International Organisations (other than IEROs) can only participate as Associated Partners in CSAs (it cannot receive funding). There is no difference between entities established in low/middle income countries and developed countries. If exceptional funding is allowed in the CSA topic, a third country participant/international organisation not listed in the General Annex to the Main Work Programme may exceptionally receive funding if their participation is essential for carrying out the project (for instance due to outstanding expertise, access to unique know-how, access to research infrastructure, access to particular geographical environments, possibility to involve key partners in emerging markets, access to data, etc.). (For more information, see the HE programme guide ) Please list the concerned applicants and requested grant amount and explain the reasons why. Based on the information provided, the following participants should receive exceptional funding: NA Based on the information provided, the following participants should NOT receive exceptional funding: NA Use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC) Status: No If YES, please state whether the use of hESC is, or is not, in your opinion, necessary to achieve the scientific objectives of the proposal and the reasons why. Alternatively, please state if it cannot be assessed whether the use of hESC is necessary or not, because of a lack of information. Not provided Use of human embryos 101270355/FuelWave-12/12/2025-10:33:01 3/4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2025)11057674 - 12/12/2025 Status: No If YES, please explain how the human embryos will be used in the project. Not provided Activities excluded from funding Status: No If YES, please explain. Not provided Exclusive focus on civil applications Status: Yes If NO, please explain. Not provided Overall comments Not provided 101270355/FuelWave-12/12/2025-10:33:01 4/4  Digitally sealed by the European Commission Date: 2025.12.12 10:40:43 CET This electronic receipt is a digitally signed version of the document submitted by your organisation. Both the content of the document and a set of metadata have been digitally sealed. This digital signature mechanism, using a public-private key pair mechanism, uniquely binds this eReceipt to the modules of the Funding & Tenders Portal of the European Commission, to the transaction for which it was generated and ensures its full integrity. Therefore a complete digitally signed trail of the transaction is available both for your organisation and for the issuer of the eReceipt. Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a break of the integrity of the electronic signature, which can be verified at any time by clicking on the eReceipt validation symbol. More info about eReceipts can be found in the FAQ page of the Funding & Tenders Portal. (https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/support/faq) Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111