Case studies of successful FP7 proposals

1. Where to begin
when it comes to FP7
Mr. Balázs Bodó
Managing Director
Geonardo Ltd.
03 December 2009, Budapest

2. „Quality never goes out of style”
(Levi’s product guarantee)

3. Case study No 1
• Call identifier: FP7-ENERGY-2007-1-RTD
• Date of publication: 22 December 2006
• Deadline: 3 May 2007 at 17.00, Brussels
local time
• Topic ENERGY.2007.3.7.1: Harmonisation
of biomass resource assessment

4. Call Text
• Content/scope: Coordination of research activities in order to
develop a common methodology for gathering information on
biomass potential using terrestrial and earth observations, and for
gathering and disseminating this information.
• Funding scheme: Coordination and Support Action (coordination
type)
• Expected impact: A harmonised approach is expected to bring a
better understanding and classification of the potential of biomass
use for bioenergy in the EU. Accessing a reliable and common
dataset on biomass potential will offer a more efficient use of the
available biomass feedstock and a better monitoring of sustainability
as well as competitiveness aspects.
• Other information: The participation of partners from Eastern
Europe and Central Asia (EECA) and Western Balkan Countries
(WBC) is especially encouraged.
• Open in call: FP7-ENERGY-2007-1-RTD

5. Call Analysis
• Key Words:
– coordination of research activities
– develop a common methodology
– gathering information on biomass potential
– terrestrial and earth observations
– harmonised approach
– reliable and common dataset
– Eastern Europe
– Western Balkan Countries
• Other issues

6. Challenges
• First call, rules are not clear
• Very specific call - competition is very high
• How to make the proposal look
interesting?
• Lack of time (about 4 weeks)

7. Proposal approach
• „Brute force” – WBC specific call, covering the
entire region
• Coordination action: highlighting past projects
and experiences
• Experienced partners: WP leaders
• FP7 novices: smaller but well defined input
• Proposal structure: based on the Call Text
• Objectives: defined in the call, methodology:
defined in the proposal
• Strong dissemination and training elements

8. The Consortium
Coordinator Geonardo Environmental Technologies Ltd. Hungary
P2 Remote Sensing Solutions GmbH Germany
P3 Center for Promotion of Clean and Efficient Energy Romania
P4 University of Ljubljana Slovenia
P5 University of Zagreb Faculty of Electrical Engineering Croatia
P6 Ciheam-Mediterranean Agronomic Institute Greece
P7 Joanneum Research Forschungsges m.b.H Austria
P8 Institute of Geodesy and Cartography Poland
P9 Balkan Foundation for Sustainable Development FYR Macedonia
P10 Serbian Biomass Renewable Energy Association Serbia
P11 Cross Czech a.s. Czech Republic
P12 Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science Sarajevo Bosnia and
Herzegovina
P13 Advanced Computer Systems A.C.S. S.p.A. Italy
P14 Slovak Innovation and Energy Agency Slovakia
P15 National Biomass Association Bulgaria
P16 Ukrainian Land and Resource Management Center Ukraine

9. Results
• Proposal title: Classification of European
Biomass Potential for Bioenergy Using
Terrestrial and Earth Observations –
CEUBIOM
• Score: 14 points, minor comments
• Budget: 1.4 million EUR
• Very tedious negotiations
• Project official starting date: 1 March 2008

10. „Every battle is won or lost
before it is ever fought”
(Sun Tzu, The Art of War)

11. Case study No 2
• Call identifier: FP7-ENV-2009-1
• Date of publication: 3 September 2008
• Deadline: 8 January 2009 at 17.00.00,
Brussels local time
• Topic ENV.2009.4.1.3.2 Earth observation
in support of a sustainable exploitation of
mineral resources

12. Call Text
• Content/scope: to provide the scientific basis to help monitoring/
observing, the impact on the environment and on the society of the
exploration and exploitation of mineral resources involving key
industrial partners. A demonstration component should be included
in the project to be carried out through pilot phases of monitoring
and observing of heavily exploited areas. More specifically it is
expected that the project would contribute to the EU Technology
Platform on Sustainable Resources in the domain of environmental
footprint reduction by using new observing, monitoring methods, and
providing information about populations and societies affected by
the exploration and exploitation of raw material. The project should
be implemented taking into account the relevant GEO tasks.
• Funding scheme: Collaborative Project (small- or medium scale
focused research project) for specific cooperation actions (SICA)
dedicated to international cooperation partner countries
• Expected impact: Improved interaction between industry and
society as foreseen in the European Platform on Sustainable
Mineral Resources and enhanced industry sustainability

13. Call Analysis
• Key Words
– exploitation of mineral resources
– monitoring/observing
– demonstration component
– pilot phases of monitoring
– involving key industrial partners
– heavily exploited areas
– EU Technology Platform on Sustainable Resources
– environmental footprint reduction
– populations and societies
– interaction between industry and society
– relevant GEO tasks
• Other issues

14. Challenges
• Time factor
• Partnership:
– EU Technology Platform on Sustainable
Resources
– Industrial Stakeholders
– Key Research Players
• Demonstrating motivation

15. Proposal Approach
• Being aware of the competition
• Being aware of partnership bottlenecks:
– Industrial players
– Technology know-how
• Specific objectives derived from the state-of-the-art
• Strong pilot/demonstration component with detailed
work description: Orenburg (Russia), Mostar (BiH),
Kristineberg (Sweden), Rosia Montana region
(Romania)
• Pilot sites – common methodological frame
• Technology showcase – assessment of applicability
and limitations - demonstration/tool development

16. The Consortium
Coordinator Geonardo Environmental Technologies, Hungary
P2. Geosense NL, The Netherlands
P3. Camborne School of Mines, UK
P4. Luleå University of Technology, Sweden
P5. Photonsplit, Croatia
P6. University of Mostar, Bosnia & Herzegovina
P7. Institute of Mineralogy, Russian Academy of Science, Russia
P8. Babes-Bolyai University, Romania
P9. Ukrainian Land and Resource Management Center, Ukraine
P10. DMT GmbH & Co.KG, Germany
P11. VITO, Belgium

17. Results
• Proposal title: Impact Monitoring of Mineral
Resources Exploitation – ImpactMin
• Score 13.5 points, no substantial
comments
• Budget: 3.2 million EUR
• Super fast and easy negotiations
• Contract signed, project starting date 1
January 2010

18. „Do or do not. Never try”
(Yoda)

19. Case Study No 3
• Call identifier: FP7-ENERGY-2008-TREN-1
• Date of publication: 29 April 2008
• Deadline: 8 October 2008 at 17.00.00,
Brussels local time
• Topic ENERGY.2008.8.4.1.: CONCERTO
communities: the way to the future

20. Call Text
• Content/Scope: The objective of CONCERTO projects is that
communities demonstrate and validate advanced, innovative
and sustainable energy solutions in which energy efficiency
and renewable energy sources are integrated from an
economic perspective, which show the possible range of
applications of renewables at community level, which deliver
high quality energy services and high value for the citizens.
• Requirements: actions should be directly linked to the
objectives of the CONCERTO project concerned, typically
addressing the management, measurement and analysis of
the energy flows in the community. Where appropriate,
research in a CONCERTO project may also address specific
issues related to the innovative technologies or integration
schemes that are being demonstrated.
• Funding scheme: Collaborative projects with a predominant
demonstration component

21. Call analysis
• Key words
– innovative energy solutions
– demonstrate and validate
– renewable energy sources
– renewables at community level
– high quality energy services
– innovative technologies
– integration schemes
• Other issues

22. Challenges
• Guess what?… time factor
• „Predominantly” demonstration (i.e. around
70%) – need to search for pilot sites
• Research, training and dissemination actions
supplementary
• Renewable integration – innovative ideas, no
problem
• Energy efficiency – more challenging
• Loads of additional paperwork (compared to
„normal” proposals)

23. Proposal Approach
• Focus on geothermal energy with small
scale RES integration
• Three strong demonstration sites:
Morahalom (Hungary), Galanta (Slovakia),
Montieri (Italy)
• General strategy: avoiding „obvious”
mistakes
• Providing 1.) easy-to-read summaries and
2.) very detailed technical descriptions

24. The Consortium
Coord Geonardo Environmental Technologies Ltd., Hungary
2 SOFTECH Energia Tecnologia Ambiente, Italy
3 Orkuveita Reykjavikur, Iceland
4 Slovak Energy Agency, Slovakia
5 Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland
6 Galantaterm, Slovakia
7 Macedonian Geothermal Association, FYROM
8 CoSviG - Distretto delle Energie Rinnovabili, Italy
9 University of Szeged, Hungary
10 Municipality of Morahalom, Hungary
11 Municipality of Galanta, Slovakia
12 Municipality of Montieri, Italy
13 Municipality of Oras Sacueni,Romania
14 Municipality of Subotica, Serbia
15 Municipality of Kocani, FYROM
16 Municipality of Mszczonow, Poland

25. Results
• Proposal title: Geothermal Communities –
demonstrating the cascading use of geothermal
energy for district heating with small scale RES
integration and retrofitting measures
• Score: 12 points, substantial comments
• Budget: 11.5 million EUR
• Negotiations started late but it was relatively fast
• Contract under signature, project starting date 1
January 2010

26. „It ain't about how hard ya hit.
It's about how hard you can get
hit and keep moving forward”
(Rocky Balboa)

27. Thank you for your attention