1. 1 Deployment Low Carbon Energy Technologies for Electric Power Generation - Initiatives and Risks CAETS Working Group Outline of Draft Report 31 August 2012

2. Outline Background Scope and Purpose Working Group members Outline of draft report Conclusions and Recommendations Timeline for completion of draft report Next steps beyond the report 2

3. Previous Report The first Working Group report Deployment of Low emissions Technologies for Electric Power Generation in Response to Climate Change (http://caets.org/cms/7122/9933.aspx),2010.http://caets.org/cms/7122/9933.aspx Massive technological and financial challenges involved in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation while, Ensuring that sufficient electric power is available to meet the growing needs of the world, Opportunities for CAETS to undertake collaborative work to facilitate the timely and cost-effective deployment of low-carbon generation technologies 3

4. Background To meet proposed targets for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, need for widespread deployment of LCE technologies. This is proving harder due to the fragile state of the global economy, the continual rise of energy demands and the heightened awareness of energy security needs While some technologies have achieved significant rates of deployment, other technologies are making slow progres s 4

5. Scope The second CAETS Energy Project Working Group Report will focus on  Promising initiatives to accelerate deployment  technical and commercial risks associated with deployment The report considers nine LCE technologies Consider only electric power generation, not associated issues 5

6. Purpose The WG report is intended to be a background resource -for those Academies that wish to engage with key stakeholders (including governments) in their countries -about strategies that might be adopted to deploy technologies to progress a successful low carbon strategy for electric power generation 6

7. Working Group Members Professor Frank Behrendt, acatech Professor Robert Evans, CAE Dr Philip Lloyd, SAAE Professor John Loughhead, RAEng Professor Myongsook Oh, NAEK Dr Baldev Raj, INAE Dr Maxine Savitz, NAE Dr Vaughan Beck, ATSE Continuing interest from EAJ is acknowledged 7

8. OUTLINE OF DRAFT REPORT

9. Report Outline Introduction Financial Considerations Assessment of individual LCE technologies What are the most promising initiatives that might accelerate investment and deployment? What integration and combinations of technologies will accelerate investment and deployment? Risks to deploy LCE technologies at scale Engineering challenges to deploy LCE technologies at scale Challenges facing industry and governments to introduce LCE technologies Conclusions and Recommendations 9

10. The potential range of costs for new sources of electricity 10

11. Individual Technologies Considered Hydroelectric Power Generation Solar Energy Geothermal Energy Marine and Tidal Energy Wind Biomass Gas Coal Carbon Sequestration Nuclear Energy 11

12. Assessment of Individual Technologies: - common headings Current State of the Technology What are the most promising initiatives for the individual technologies that might accelerate their investment and deployment? Does this technology lend itself to integration and combination with other technologies that will likewise accelerate investment and deployment? What are the technological / engineering risks to be overcome to achieve wide-scale deployment for this technology incorporating the most promising initiatives? Include related technological issues such as grid connection and stability 12

13. Assessment continued What is the investment required at scale for this technology incorporating the most promising initiatives Time scale for deployment at scale for this technology incorporating the most promising initiatives Other risks to be overcome Technology Ranking 13

14. Example: Marine and Tidal Current State of the Technology - Marine: Emerging technology. Minor contribution - Tidal: Near Commercial (mostly horizontal axis) - Barrages: Use existing technologies What are the most promising initiatives - Marine: Oscillating, bottom-fixed wave devices Integration and combination with other technologies - Some possibilities for complementarity with energy storage Technological / engineering risks - Marine: Hostile operating environment; durability etc. - Remote operation - beyond existing capabilities Investment: $2/W to $5/W Time Scale: 5GW marine unlikely before 2030 14

15. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

16. Conclusions New LCE technologies are technically feasible and major cost reductions are possible – promising initiatives, but significant risks must be overcome for their widespread commercial deployment FOAK technologies have high risk and may not receive commercial support initially. A possible role for government support No single winning LCE technology. Hence a portfolio of technologies can be expected to be deployed 16

17. Conclusions continued Substantial investment is required in RD&D and new electricity generating plant (USD 6.4 trillion, 10 yrs) Major engineering challenges 17

18. Recommendations Governments to implement consistent, long-term policies and energy pricing strategies to support sustained RD&D and private investment Need to adopt a systems approach to deployment. Including consideration of safety and environmental risks and risks to community. Achieve a social license to operate GHG reductions is a global issue – hence international RD&D collaboration should be undertaken, particularly in critical areas such as CCS 18

19. TIMELINE FOR COMPLETION & Beyond

20. Timeline for Completion August 2012: Working Group Meeting & Comments September 2012: Revised sections completed and reviewed October 2012: Collate revised draft and technical edit November 2012: Revised draft report sent to WG Academies for comment December 2012: WG Academies comments received January/ February 2013: Report finalised and send to CAETS member academies February 2013: Prepare report for publishing March 2013: WG Report available on web 20

21. Beyond WG Energy Phase II? Many issues beyond electric power generation WG has proposed establishment of a CAETS Standing Group/ Committee on Energy Possible topics: Transport fuels Needs: - Meetings of WG - Secretariat - Funding? 21

22. Thank You - Any questions? Dr Vaughan Beck Senior Technical Advisor, ATSE P: 61 418 362 792 / 61 3 9889 4343 ATSE: 03 9864 0900 E: sa.vaughanbeck@atse.org.ausa.vaughanbeck@atse.org.au Professor Frank Behrendt, acatech Professor Robert Evans, CAE Professor Philip Lloyd, SAAE Professor Myongsook Oh, NAEK 22

23. Part B – Technology Assessments Ranking Life Cycle reduction of CO 2 generation compared to standard coal-based generation 180-100% 260-79% 340-59% 420-39 % 50-19% Ability to lower the carbon footprint 23

24. Part B – Technology Assessments Definition of Technology Readiness Levels TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reported TRL 2 Technology concept and/or application formulated TRL 3 Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of concept TRL 4 Component/subsystem validation in laboratory environment TRL 5 System/subsystem/component validation in relevant environment TRL 6 System/subsystem model or prototyping demonstration in a relevant end-to- end environment (ground or space) TRL 7 System prototyping demonstration in an operational environment (ground or space) TRL 8 Actual system completed and "mission qualified" through test and demonstration in an operational environment (ground or space) TRL 9 Actual system "mission proven" through successful mission operations (ground or space) 24

25. Executive Summary 25