Avrupa Komisyonu yetkilileri tarafından, 4 Şubat 2025 tarihinde kapanacak olan Küme 5- Hedef 3: Sürdürülebilir, Güvenli ve Rekabetçi Enerji Arzı ile Hedef 4: Verimli, Sürdürülebilir ve Kapsayıcı Enerji Kullanımı çağrı başlıkları altındaki bazı çağrı başlıklarına iletilen sorulara ilişkin verilen yanıtlar aşağıda bilgilerinize sunulmaktadır. 

Yaklaşık 10 gün içerisinde kapanacak olan çağrılara ilişkin desteğe ihtiyacınız olması durumunda bizlerle ncpenergy@tubitak.gov.tr adresi üzerinden irtibata geçebilirsiniz. 

Başvuracak tüm paydaşlarımıza başarılar dileriz. 

HORIZON-CL5-2024-D3-02-02 Development of next generation synthetic renewable fuel technologies

Question: Can you please clarify if the topic in object allows the use of Glycerol (anodic reaction for formate production), other than biogenic CO2 (cathodic reaction for ethanol production), in the reactor, in order to reduce the energy consumption in the full process and fulfil the targets or cost-efficiency and energy efficiency, which also impact the GHG emissions and sustainability of the process. The use of crude glycerol will also entail the production of an additional e-fuel from our reactor (Formate), other than Ethanol, which can also be used in Fuel Cells.

On the other hand, during the production of biodiesel and Sustainable Aviation Fuels, SAFs crude glycerol is produced as a side product, thus, our technology could exploit and valorise such a waste. Moreover, glycerol (in the form of crude glycerine) is one of the feedstocks for Advanced Fuels (a form of Sustainable Aviation Fuels, SAFs), which are different from the Synthetic aviation fuels, also known as renewable fuels of nonbiological origin (RFNBOs), based on this article of the EU Commission: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2022/729333/EPRS_ATA(2022)729333_EN.pdf.

• Reply: Biomass per se is not an intended source in this topic, although it cannot be strictly excluded. For example biogenic CO2 is in scope, but the focus is on its synthesis with renewable hydrogen and renewable energy rather than on extracting this CO2 from biomass. In this process crude glycerol when produced from biodiesel or SAF as a side stream is of biogenic origin, and thus it cannot be used in this topic, although it is a valuable source as an intermediate bioenergy carrier which can be further upgraded to SAF. Fossil glycerol is not renewable and thus not in scope. Please note that we had a previous topic on next generation advanced biofuels technologies , i.e., HORIZON-CL5-2023-D3-02-07: Development of next generation advanced biofuel technologies, which focused on biomass processing to advanced biofuels, and where biogenic glycerol processing could be fitted.

HORIZON-CL5-2024-D3-02-03 Development of smart concepts of integrated energy driven bio-refineries for co-production of advanced biofuels, bio-chemicals and biomaterials

The topic mentions: “An assessment of the feedstock cost supply at regional and local level and improvement of feedstock mobilization patterns……should be included”.

Question 1: Could you please specify what is considered “regional level” and what is “local level”?

• Regional level is larger than local level and can include many neighbouring local  areas.

Question 2:  Regarding the “regional level”, does it have to be necessarily cross-border or can it be within the same country?

• Regional level does not necessarily imply cross-border. For example, feedstock can be sourced from the same region in a country.

HORIZON-CL5-2024-D3-02-04 Critical technologies for the future ocean energy farms

Question: The topic mentions: “It is expected that key performance indicators are used based on international recognised metrics”. Where can be found the references of those “international recognized metrics”?

• They can be found in the webinar on the internationally agreed performance metrics organised by the European Technology and Innovation Platform : ETIP | ETIP Ocean & IEA-OES webinar: Use of internationally agreed performance metrics in project development as part of Horizon Europe Ocean Energy funding applications

HORIZON-CL5-2024-D4-02-02: Robotics and other automated solutions for construction, renovation and maintenance in a sustainable built environment (Built4People Partnership)

Question 1: What is meant by prototype? 

• Prototype under the context of topic HORIZON-CL5-2024-D4-02-02 refers to an innovative and working robotic and/or automated solution, not to a construction component.  

Question 2:  Should each of these prototypes be representative of both a construction and a renovation (valid for both) or if on the contrary a prototype should be focused solely on one of them (either on construction or on renovation)?

• The topic text mentions that proposals are expected to ‘test and validate the prototyped solutions in at least three prototypes to assess the proposed approaches for a variety of buildings typologies representative of the European building stock’. The topic text also mentions that ‘testing and validation of these prototypes are expected to address both new construction and renovation’. It is up to the applicants to decide whether each of the, at least three, prototypes will address both new construction and renovation, or only new construction, or only renovation. However, for a proposal to be successful, both new construction and renovation need to be addressed, either in combination or alone, by at least one prototype.

Question 3: The call mentions the construction stage frequently, but there is also indirect reference to the o­­peration and maintenance phase. How much emphasis should we place on the operation and maintenance stage (especially regarding energy efficiency and sustainability) compared to the construction and/or renovation stage?

• The topic title and scope refers to construction, renovation and maintenance. Proposals are expected to address all of these, as mentioned under the scope. It is up to the applicants to determine the extent to which their proposal focuses on each of these aspects, whilst taking account of the expected outcomes of the topic. In this respect, applicants should consider the results – outcomes – impacts pathways, whilst keeping in mind the objectives of reducing construction time and errors, facilitating maintenance, and minimising the impact on the surrounding environment.

Question 4:  The scope of the call mentions “automated design and construction techniques.” How much weight should we give to the design stage compared to the construction and renovation on-site, particularly in terms of automation?

• This is up to the applicants to decide, as long as they ensure that they address all the expected outcomes and all the aspects expected to be addressed under the scope of the topic text. In this respect, applicants should consider the results – outcomes – impact pathway, keeping in mind that proposals are expected to contribute to all of the expected outcomes listed in the topic. 

Question 5:  Regarding the scale of the demonstrations: should they be prototypes or full-scale real-life demos? Can you also confirm the stated TRL (Technology Readiness Level) 4-5?

• As stated in the Call text, activities are expected to achieve TRL 4-5 by the end of the project. Thus the proposals are expected to validate the developed technologies in a lab or another relevant environment. The topic text does not specify full-scale real-life demo sites.

Question 6:  Could we get more clarity on the size of the site expected for the demonstration?

• We note that this is linked to the previous question. As stated in the Call text, activities are expected to achieve TRL 4-5 by the end of the project. Thus the proposals are expected to validate the developed technologies in a lab or another relevant environment relevant. The topic text does not specify full-scale real-life demo sites. (Idem with previous answer).

Question 7:  Lastly, could you help us interpret the typology of the construction? What do the different building typologies mean in the context of this call?

• In the call text, the term ‘building typologies’ may refer to either the building usage, or building form, or construction materials of the building, or a combination of these. The proposal should address a variety of buildings typologies representative of the European building stock. It is up to the applicant to select which typologies are most relevant to the scope of their proposed solutions and research activities.

HORIZON-CL5-2024-D4-02-05: Digital solutions to foster participative design, planning and management of buildings, neighbourhoods and urban districts (Built4People Partnership)

Question 1: One of the expected outcomes is : Increase in plans for climate neutral and sustainable, aesthetic and inclusive built environments with enhanced climate adaptation and resilience (e.g. based on nature-based solutions). We would like clarification as to the definition of “plans”.  Are each of the 3 "real-life urban development projects”  meant to produce sustainable urban planning proposals?  

 eg. Such as those that should be approved at a local/regional level and become part of municipalities spatial planning frameworks. Or can the term “plans" be interpreted more loosely as Transition plans/low-carbon roadmaps?  eg. Such as co-created low carbon action plans for energy renovations of urban neighbourhoods. The former would normally require the involvement of architects, developers and urban planners, whereas the latter are usually produced by community energy champions and like-minded organisations.

• Reply: The Horizon Europe Programme defines outcome as ‘the expected effects, over the medium term, of projects supported under a given topic. The results of a project should contribute to these outcomes, fostered in particular by the dissemination and exploitation measures. (…) Outcomes generally occur during or shortly after the end of the project.’ The topic text states that this topic focuses on the development of digital solutions for a stronger participation of end users, citizens, and other relevant stakeholders in the design, planning and management of the renovation of existing buildings, neighbourhoods and / or districts. Therefore, projects have to focus on the development of such ‘digital solutions’ rather than of ‘plans’. However, proposals must convincingly demonstrate a credible pathway for the project to contribute to the expected outcomes, includingan increase in plans for climate neutral and sustainable, aesthetic and inclusive built environments with enhanced climate adaptation and resilience. The term ‘plans’ is not defined and may, as you note, refer for example to more concrete urban planning proposals or more loosely to transition plans / low-carbon roadmaps. It is up to the applicants to determine and justify the specific application area of their proposed ‘digital solution’, whilst taking account of the expected outcomes of the topic.

Question 2: Proposals are expected to: Demonstrate the prototype in at least three real-life urban development projects to apply, evaluate and refine the digital solution and inform its market launch and / or commercialisation strategy. Q2.1: Should the same digital solution “the prototype” be demonstrated in all three real-life urban development projects?  Or could there eg. be different bespoke digital solutions developed for use in each use case ? Q2.2: Must the “digital solution" be a product that can be commercialised by one or more of the partners after the project?  Eg. could the solution (eg. a district scale digital twin ) be something that is owned by public authorities rather than being a commercialisable product?

• Reply: Q2.1: It is expected that the prototype (of the proposed digital solution) is demonstrated in at least three real-life urban development projects. If the proposal covers the development of more than one digital solution, then each prototype of the proposed digital solution should be demonstrated in at least three real-life urban development projects. These can be the same three real-life urban development projects. However, it is up to the applicant to determine and justify the number and type of real-life urban development projects necessary to appropriately demonstrate the prototype(s) as long as there are at least three. Q2.2: The call text does not specify how to exploit the results of the project such as the prototype(s) of the digital solution(s) at TRL 6-8, nor who owns the solution. It is up to the applicants to outline their proposed exploitation strategy in a first version of a ‘plan for the dissemination and exploitation including communication activities’ as well as their strategy for the management of intellectual property in the proposal (please see guidance in the ‘application form’).  

Question 3:  Another expected outcome is : Greater engagement of representative groups of end users as well as citizens of the impacted urban context. We interpret this as a requirement to involve a wide range of stakeholders and citizens during the development of the plans for the 3 urban development project use-cases. However, we assume that there is no expectation that any of the Horizon grant should be used for implementation activities eg. of “sustainable deep renovation solutions” and there is no mention in the call of a need to demonstrate, or consider, how implementation of the solutions will be financed.  We are concerned that if we engage citizens in comprehensive "participative design and planning" processes to create plans for development projects that do not have the potential of financial backing from the EU (or other funding sources ) there is a high risk that many will consider it a waste of time and not wish to engage with the process. How is this viewed on by the Commission? 

Are there dedicated European / National funds being made available that can be used for the implementation of the plans?

• Reply: We note that this questions is linked to your first question. The Horizon Europe Programme defines outcome as ‘the expected effects, over the medium term, of projects supported under a given topic. The results of a project should contribute to these outcomes, fostered in particular by the dissemination and exploitation measures. (…) Outcomes generally occur during or shortly after the end of the project.’ The topic text states that this topic focuses on the development of digital solutions for a stronger participation of end users, citizens, and other relevant stakeholders in the design, planning and management of the renovation of existing buildings, neighbourhoods and / or districts. Therefore, projects have to focus on the development of such ‘digital solutions’ and the purpose of the proposed project should not be to implement urban development projects. However, proposals must convincingly demonstrate a credible pathway for the project to contribute to the expected outcomes, includingthe greater engagement of representative groups of end users as well as citizens of the impacted urban context. On the other hand, the proposed methodology must adequately address, among other points, the engagement of citizens, endusers and other relevant stakeholders in the development process of the digital solution. It is up to the applicant to determine and justify the required number and characteristics of citizens, users and other relevant stakeholders to appropriately develop the digital solution.

 

 

Küme 5 Çalışma Programı Ufuk Avrupa Programı Çalışma Programı 2023-2024 Enerji

27.01.2025 |  Teknoloji Transfer Ofisi Müdürlüğü