Clean Energy Council (CEC) Annual Conference 2015 Compiled Presentations

Compilation of Presentations

Strictly confidential

July 2015

"Blood, sweat and tears"

Utility of the future

David Leitch

Analyst

[email protected]

Australian Utilities Research

This document has been prepared by UBS Securities Australia Ltd

ANALYST CERTIFICATION AND REQUIRED DISCLOSURES BEGIN ON SLIDE 16

UBS does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of

interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision.

1 1

Summary- Four thoughts

1. The roof-top PV market and the share held by small installers may significantly reduce over the next few years

2. The NEM will possibly have to be redesigned

3. Networks potentially have the best opportunity set of all the players in the industry. We believe its quite possible

that retailers and networks will merge in the future.

4. Does a decarbonised electricity system really require large amounts of storage?

5. One way or another big utilities with low costs of capital and ability to evolve their strategy will likely reassert their

traditional dominance

2 2

• Electricity demand is likely to be flat to declining over the next 20 years

• PV and wind will therefore have to force other generation out of the market as opposed to supplying incremental

demand

• Jacobson's paradox - (100% renewables in the USA for all energy consumption would see 39% reduction in end

use power demand).

Problem 1: Capacity supply glut

3 3

Electricity consumption growth is forecasted to slow…

Source: UBSe, EIA

Figure 3: Forecasted electricity consumption also expected to fall

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

Europe USA China2010-2015 2015-2020

Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy

Figure 1: 2014 electricity consumption growth

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

India China Americas World ex china& India

Europe

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015UBSe

20154mths to

April

China electricity consumption growth

Figure 2: China consumption growth slowing rapidly

Source: UBS, Greenpeace

4 4

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Structure effect Activity effect Efficiency effect TFC

• Energy efficiency and conservation have made large contributions to reducing fossil fuel output

Energy Efficiency

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

Energyefficiencysavings of

II IEAmembercountries

Asia (ex.China)

China EuropeanUnion

UnitedStates

Avoided Energy TFC

Mto

e

Figure 4: Energy efficiency savings compared to

TFC, 2011

Source: IEA

Figure 5: Decomposition of TFC between 2001 and 2011

Source: IEA

5 5

• PV capacity utilisation is unlikely to exceed 20% annually but will work at ~100% of capacity for at least an

hour or two of most days

• This means that for any market, when PV capacity is enough to supply 20% of annual energy, it will

represent 100% of market demand for those couple of hours

• One consequence of this problem is as solar penetration grows, its marginal revenue will fall and the limit

will be zero

• We already see the AEMO publishing minimum demand forecasts for South Australia and Germany has

slowed solar installation rates

• However so far the data in Australia shows only limited support that PV forces down midday prices.

Problem 2: PV - a part-time solution

6 6

Lunchtime issues

PV, like wind cannabilises its incentive price

Grid PV Total PV share Median pool price

Today

Demand 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM GW 24 3 26 10% 33.00$

Energy TWh 195 5 200 2%

PV demand estimated @ 70% of NEM installed capacity

The 10% in 10 scenario

Demand 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM GW 16 11 27 41% ?

Energy TWh 189 21 210 10%

The 20% in 20 scenario

Demand 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM GW 5 24 29 82% ?

Energy TWh 177 44 221 20%

underlying growth 0.5% per year

Source: NEM Review, APVI, UBSe

7 7

Figure 9: South Australia, not so much Figure 8: QLD, some evidence of midday peak flattening

Pool prices evolution in selected higher solar States

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

$MWh

30 days median price ended 20th Feb Qld

2010

2015

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

00

:00

01

:00

02

:00

03

:00

04

:00

05

:00

06

:00

07

:00

08

:00

09

:00

10

:00

11

:00

12

:00

13

:00

14

:00

15

:00

16

:00

17

:00

18

:00

19

:00

20

:00

21

:00

22

:00

23

:00

$MWh

30 day median ended 20 Feb

2010

2012

2015

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

00

:00

01

:00

02

:00

03

:00

04

:00

05

:00

06

:00

07

:00

08

:00

09

:00

10

:00

11

:00

12

:00

13

:00

14

:00

15

:00

16

:00

17

:00

18

:00

19

:00

20

:00

21

:00

22

:00

23

:00

$MWh

30 days median price ended 20th Feb

2010

2012

2015

Source: NEM Review Source: NEM Review

8 8

Wind costs also falling

Source: UBSe, EIA

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

1.25

Jun-08 Jun-09 Jun-10 Jun-11 Jun-12 Jun-13

Figure 6: Price of wind is falling (€ m per MW)

Source: Bloomberg

Figure 7: USA wind farms LCOE 2013

Source: NREL

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2002-03:Standard Tech

2009-10:Standard Tech

Current

Le

ve

lise

d c

ost,

no

ince

nti

ve

s (

$/M

Wh

)

9 9

Problem 3 – Who will own the means of production?

• Rooftop PV

• Metering

• Micro grids

• Community grids

• Remote power

• Economies of scale

In the end it will mostly end up in the hands of the corporate (see PCs, digital

music)

10 10

UBS's most recent vision

Figure 10: The future of solar belongs with utilities, and could potentially transform the whole value chain

Source: UBSe

Valuations across the chain are set to change. Even via batteries, customers will not be able to "get off the

grid". Indeed, investments in power distribution are set to accelerate owing to the need to turn the grid into

"intelligent" and fit grid-scale batteries. The value of global renewable platforms should also surge, to

discount the "solar-conversion-optionality". Lastly, the rising penetration of renewables should lead to

rethinking the philosophy at the core of merchant markets, which we expect will eventually reconvert into

regulated regimes.

Utilities will soon become lead actors in "large-solar".

11 11

Large intrinsic value in power distribution activities and global renewables platforms – The power distribution

grid will need to become self-balancing, given the rising share of intermittent volumes injected, and the rising

frequency-volatility. This will require vast long term investments (smart grids and grid-scale batteries), to the tune of

>€3trn by 2050. Thus, we believe that most of the "hidden value" in the utilities space lies in power distribution and in

global renewable platforms (even though currently largely devoted to developing wind) as these will soon be

converted into 'solar springboards' and fuel larger than expected growth.

Smart grid total capex estimated at around Euro 900 per customer

Distribution the likely biggest winner

Figure 11: Europe: Benefits of smart grids outweigh costs, per customer analysts

Source: UBSe

$/customer Comment

Extra costs 146 6% ROIC, 2% opex 35 yr life

Savings per customer per year from smart grid 173

Consisting of

Lower losses and thefts 33 2% of system

Lower consumption 81 5% reduction due to change in habits

Peak shifting 15 10% shift

Lower thermal capacity needed 6 22 GW of closures

Lower CO2 costs 19 150 mt @ euro 25/t

Lower opex and capex 21 25% lower cost v standard grid

EU USA Asia

Customers (m) 293 228 1938

Savings (A$bn) 51 39 336

Figure 12: Global savings from smart grids $400 bn/yr

Source: UBSe

12 12

• What is happening in Europe?

• A combination of demand decline and renewable additions will force thermal generation to close

• Currently EU power market >900GW, gas/coal ~30% and 46% renewables (Figure 13)

• We estimate half of thermal fleet to be FCF negative by 2017

• Half of thermal fleet equates to 125GW (~15% of total installed capacity)

• Unrealistic to assume 125GW of closures as reserve margins fall below zero

• However seeing evidence of thermal closures already, with 70GW cumulative since 2010 (Figure 14)

• If markets are rational, we expect 10GW p.a of closures to 2017 (30GW in total from 2015-17)

European thermal generation Free Cash Flow

Source: UBSe

Figure 13: Eu Generation Market Figure 14: Coal & CCGT closures (GW)

Source: UBSe, Company data

13 13

Global solar player's financials – No big players

Source: FactSet

Figure 15: Global solar player's financials

$USm Market Cap Price ($US)

2014

Sales

2014

EBITDA 2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017

SunEdison Inc 8,348 30.41 2,484 -51 -2.79 -1.28 -1.97 -10.9 -23.8 -15.5

First Solar Inc 4,439 44.03 3,392 659 1.99 3.55 1.53 22.1 12.4 28.8

SolarCity Corp 5,133 53.00 255 -236 -5.51 -6.43 0.72 -9.6 -8.2 73.8

SunPower Corp 3,504 26.29 3,027 429 0.50 0.87 n.a. 52.6 30.1 n.a.

Canadian Solar 1,439 25.83 2,961 447 2.62 2.02 1.90 9.9 12.8 13.6

Vivint Solar 1,201 11.34 25 -139 -1.88 -2.76 -2.54 -6.0 -4.1 -4.5

Trina 869 10.20 2,277 237 0.88 1.18 1.08 11.6 8.6 9.4

Jinko Solar 788 25.34 1,617 211 3.76 4.06 6.26 6.7 6.2 4.0

Neo Solar Power Corp 693 0.81 917 75 -1.58 -0.45 n.a. -0.5 -1.8 n.a.

MoTech Industries 556 1.26 659 15 -4.18 -5.33 n.a. -0.3 -0.2 n.a.

JA Solar 379 7.50 1,831 204 1.23 0.72 1.62 6.1 10.4 4.6

Yingli Green Energy 180 0.99 2,095 177 -0.69 0.01 -0.75 -1.4 99.2 -1.3

Solartron 216 0.43 28 4 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Gintech Energy Corp 272 0.67 514 56 -2.49 n.a. n.a. -0.3 n.a. n.a.

SolarWorld 224 15.03 761 -155 -1.30 0.59 0.88 -11.5 25.5 17.0

Green Energy Tech 221 0.53 504 14 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Hanwha Q Cells 143 14.33 784 39 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

ReneSola 114 1.31 1,555 86 -0.52 -0.43 -0.07 -2.5 -3.0 -19.1

Median -0.3 7.4 4.6

Consensus EPS PE

14 14

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15

Full integrated Upstream Downstream

Solar share price performance

Source: FactSet

Figure 16: Sector share price performance indexed at 9th July 2010

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15

15 15

Module manufacturer profitability low but increasing

(1,200)

(1,000)

(800)

(600)

(400)

(200)

0

200

400

600

2012 2013 2014

Canadian Solar Trina Jinko Solar Yingli Green Energy

$USm

(800)

(600)

(400)

(200)

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

2012 2013 2014

Canadian Solar Trina Jinko Solar Yingli Green Energy

$USm

Source: Company, FactSet, UBSe

Figure 17: Ebitda minus capex Figure 18: Ebitda

Source: Company, FactSet, UBSe

Figure 19: 1Q15 earnings snapshot

US$m 1Q15 4Q15 q/q 1Q14 y/y

Canadian Solar

Revenue 860.9 956.2 -10% 466.3 85%

EBIT 78.7 68.9 14% 42.0 87%

Trina

Revenue 558.1 705.0 -21% 444.8 25%

EBIT 29.2 30.5 -4% 38.2 -24%

Jinko Solar

Revenue 443.5 478.9 -7% 323.9 37%

EBIT 37.1 38.1 -3% 32.7 13%

Yingli Green Energy

Revenue 468.7 555.5 -16% 408.9 15%

EBIT -10.7 -32.2 67% -20.7 48%

Source: Company

16 16

Statement of Risk

Analyst Certification

Each research analyst primarily responsible for the content of this research report, in whole or in part, certifies that with respect to each

security or issuer that the analyst covered in this report: (1) all of the views expressed accurately reflect his or her personal views about

those securities or issuers and were prepared in an independent manner, including with respect to UBS, and (2) no part of his or her

compensation was, is, or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed by that research

analyst in the research report.

Risks associated with investing in infrastructure and utilities businesses include: 1) given the longer-duration nature of the assets,

valuation of these assets is sensitive to changes in long-bond rates; 2) acquisition risk; 3) unfavourable regulatory rulings (including

structural changes to pricing and the competitive playing field); 4) one-off shocks impacting the use of infrastructure assets; 5) exposure

to price volatility; and 6) growth rates not meeting expectations.

17 17

Required Disclosures & Analyst Certification

This report has been prepared by UBS Securities Australia Limited, an affiliate of UBS AG. UBS AG, its subsidiaries, branches and affiliates are referred to herein as UBS.

For information on the ways in which UBS manages conflicts and maintains independence of its research product; historical performance information; and certain additional disclosures

concerning UBS research recommendations, please visit www.ubs.com/disclosures. The figures contained in performance charts refer to the past; past performance is not a reliable

indicator of future results. Additional information will be made available upon request. UBS Securities Co. Limited is licensed to conduct securities investment consultancy businesses by

the China Securities Regulatory Commission.

Analyst Certification: Each research analyst primarily responsible for the content of this research report, in whole or in part, certifies that with respect to each security or issuer that the

analyst covered in this report: (1) all of the views expressed accurately reflect his or her personal views about those securities or issuers and were prepared in an independent manner,

including with respect to UBS, and (2) no part of his or her compensation was, is, or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed by that

research analyst in the research report.

UBS Investment Research: Global Equity Rating Definitions

12-Month Rating Definition Coverage1 IB Services2

Buy FSR is > 6% above the MRA. 45% 36%

Neutral FSR is between -6% and 6% of the MRA. 42% 32%

Sell FSR is > 6% below the MRA. 13% 20%

Short-Term Rating Definition Coverage3 IB Services4

Buy Stock price expected to rise within three months from the time the rating was assigned because of a specific catalyst or event.

less than 1% less than 1%

Sell Stock price expected to fall within three months from the time the rating was assigned because of a specific catalyst or event.

less than 1% less than 1%

Source: UBS. Rating allocations are as of 30 June 2015. 1:Percentage of companies under coverage globally within the 12-month rating category. 2:Percentage of companies within the 12-month rating category for which investment banking (IB) services were provided within the past 12 months. 3:Percentage of companies under coverage globally within the Short-Term rating category. 4:Percentage of companies within the Short-Term rating category for which investment banking (IB) services were provided within the past 12 months.

KEY DEFINITIONS: Forecast Stock Return (FSR) is defined as expected percentage price appreciation plus gross dividend yield over the next 12 months. Market Return

Assumption (MRA) is defined as the one-year local market interest rate plus 5% (a proxy for, and not a forecast of, the equity risk premium). Under Review (UR) Stocks may be

flagged as UR by the analyst, indicating that the stock's price target and/or rating are subject to possible change in the near term, usually in response to an event that may affect the

investment case or valuation. Short-Term Ratings reflect the expected near-term (up to three months) performance of the stock and do not reflect any change in the fundamental

view or investment case. Equity Price Targets have an investment horizon of 12 months.

18 18

Required Disclosures & Analyst Certification (cont.)

EXCEPTIONS AND SPECIAL CASES: UK and European Investment Fund ratings and definitions are: Buy: Positive on factors such as structure, management, performance record,

discount; Neutral: Neutral on factors such as structure, management, performance record, discount; Sell: Negative on factors such as structure, management, performance record,

discount. Core Banding Exceptions (CBE): Exceptions to the standard +/-6% bands may be granted by the Investment Review Committee (IRC). Factors considered by the IRC include

the stock's volatility and the credit spread of the respective company's debt. As a result, stocks deemed to be very high or low risk may be subject to higher or lower bands as they relate

to the rating. When such exceptions apply, they will be identified in the Company Disclosures table in the relevant research piece.

Research analysts contributing to this report who are employed by any non-US affiliate of UBS Securities LLC are not registered/qualified as research analysts with the NASD and NYSE and

therefore are not subject to the restrictions contained in the NASD and NYSE rules on communications with a subject company, public appearances, and trading securities held by a

research analyst account. The name of each affiliate and analyst employed by that affiliate contributing to this report, if any, follows.

UBS Securities Australia Limited:.

Unless otherwise indicated, please refer to the Valuation and Risk sections within the body of this report.

19 19

Contact information

www.ubs.com

David Leitch

UBS Utilities Research

Level 16 Chifley Tower

2 Chifley Square

Sydney

NSW 2000

Level 16

+61 2 9324 3870

[email protected]

20 20

Global disclaimer

This document has been prepared by UBS Securit ies Australia Ltd, an aff iliate of UBS AG. UBS AG, its subsidiaries, branches and affiliates are referred to herein as UBS.

Global Research is provided to our clients through UBS Neo, the UBS Client Portal and UBS.com (each a " System" ). It may also be made available through third party vendors and distributed by UBS and/or third parties via e-mail or alternative electronic means. The level and types of services provided by Global Research to a client may vary depending upon various factors such as a client' s individual preferences as to the frequency and manner of receiving communications, a client 's risk pro file and

investment focus and perspective (e.g. market wide, sector specific, long-term, short-term, etc.), the size and scope of the overall client relationship with UBS and legal and regulatory constraints.

When you receive Global Research through a System, your access and/or use of such Global Research is subject to this Global Research Disclaimer and to the terms of use governing the applicable System.

When you receive Global Research via a third party vendor, e-mail or other electronic means, your use shall be subject to this Global Research Disclaimer and to UBS's Terms of Use/Disclaimer (http://www.ubs.com/global/en /legalinfo2 /disclaimer.html). By accessing and /or using Global Research in this manner, you are indicating that you have read and agree to be bound by our Terms of Use/Disclaimer. In addition, you consent to UBS processing your personal data and using cookies in accordance with our

Privacy Statement (http://www.ubs.com/global/en /legalinfo2 /privacy.html) and cookie notice (http://www.ubs.com/global/en/homepage/cookies/cookie-management.html).

If you receive Global Research, whether through a System or by any other means, you agree that you shall not copy, revise, amend, create a derivative work, transfer to any third party, or in any way commercially exploit any UBS

research provided via Global Research or otherwise, and that you shall not extract data from any research o r estimates provided to you via Global Research or otherw ise, w ithout the prior w ritten consent of UBS.

For access to all available Global Research on UBS Neo and the Client Portal, please contact your UBS sales representative.

This document is for distribution only as may be permitted by law. It is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in any locality, state, country or other jurisdict ion where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation or would subject UBS to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction. It is published solely for information purposes; it is not an advertisement nor is it a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any financial instruments or to participate in any part icular trading strategy. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is provided in relation to the accuracy, completeness or rel iability of the information contained in this document (‘the Information’), except with respect to Information concerning UBS. The Information is not intended to be a complete statement or summary of the securities, markets or developments referred to in t he document. UBS does not undertake to update or keep current the Information. Any opinions expressed in this document may change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by other business areas or groups of UBS. Any statements contained in this report attributed to a third party represent UBS's interpretation of the data, information and /or opinions provided by that third party either publicly or through a subscription service, and such use and interpretation have not

been reviewed by the third party.

Nothing in this document constitutes a representation that any investment strategy or recommendation is suitable or appropriate to an investor’s individual circumstances or otherwise constitutes a personal recommendation. Investments involve risks, and investors should exercise prudence and their own judgement in making their investment decisions. The financial instruments described in the document may not be eligible for sale in all jurisdictions or to certain categories of investors. Options, derivative products and futures are not suitable for all investors, and trading in these instruments is considered risky. Mor tgage and asset-backed securit ies may involve a high degree of risk and may be highly volatile in response to fluctuations in interest rates or other market conditions. Foreign currency rates of exchange may adversely affect the value, price or income of any security or related instrument referred to in the document. For investment advice, trade execution or other enquiries, clients

should contact their local sales representative.

The value of any investment or income may go down as well as up, and investors may not get back the full (or any) amount invested. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance. Neither UBS nor any of its directors, employees or

agents accepts any liability for any loss (including investment loss) or damage arising out of the use of all or any of the Information.

Any prices stated in this document are for information purposes only and do not represent valuations for individual securit ies or other f inancial instruments. There is no representation that any transaction can or could have been effected at those prices, and any prices do not necessarily ref lect UBS's internal books and records or theoretical model-based valuations and may be based on certain assumptions. Different assumptions by UBS or any other source may yield substant ially different results.

This document and the Information are produced by UBS as part of its research function and are provided to you solely for general background information. UBS has no regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation or particular needs of

any specific recipient. In no circumstances may this document or any of the Information be used for any of the following purposes:

(i) valuation or accounting purposes;

(ii) to determine the amounts due or payable, the price or the value of any financial instrument or financial contract; or

(iii) to measure the performance of any financial instrument.

By receiving this document and the Information you will be deemed to represent and warrant to UBS that you will not use this document or any of the Information for any of the above purposes or otherwise rely upon this document or any of t he

Information.

Research will initiate, update and cease coverage solely at the discretion of UBS Investment Bank Research Management. The analysis contained in this document is based on numerous assumptions. Different assumptions could result in materiall y different results. The analyst(s) responsible for the preparation of this document may interact with trading desk personnel, sales personnel and other part ies for the purpose of gathering, applying and interpreting market information. UBS relies on information barriers to control the flow of information contained in one or more areas within UBS into other areas, units, groups or affiliates of UBS. The compensation of the analyst who prepared this document is determined exclusively by research management and senior management (not including investment banking). Analyst compensation is not based on investment banking revenues; however, compensation may relate to the revenues of UBS Investment Bank as a whole, of which investment

banking, sales and trading are a part.

For financial instruments admitted to trading on an EU regulated market: UBS AG, its affiliates or subsidiaries (excluding UBS Securities LLC) acts as a market maker or liquidity provider (in accordance with the interpretation of these terms in the UK) in the financial instruments of the issuer save that where the activity of liquidity provider is carried out in accordance with the definition given to it by the laws and regulations of any other EU jurisdictions, such information is separately disclosed in this document. For financial instruments admitted to trading on a non-EU regulated market: UBS may act as a market maker save that where this activity is carried out in the US in accordance with the definition given to it by the relevant laws and regulations, such activity will be specifically disclosed in this document. UBS may have issued a warrant the value of which is based on one or more of the financial instruments referred to in the document. UBS and its affiliates and employees may have long or short

positions, trade as principal and buy and sell in instruments or derivatives identif ied herein; such transactions or positions may be inconsistent with the opinions expressed in this document.

21 21

Global disclaimer (continued)

United Kingdom and the rest of Europe: Except as otherwise specified herein, this material is distributed by UBS Limited to persons who are eligible counterparties or professional clients. UBS Limited is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. France: Prepared by UBS Limited and distributed by UBS Limited and UBS Securities France S.A. UBS Securit ies France S.A. is regulated by the ACPR (Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution) and the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF). Where an analyst of UBS Securities France S.A. has contributed to this document, the document is also deemed to have been prepared by UBS Securities

France S.A. Germany: Prepared by UBS Limited and distributed by UBS Limited and UBS Deutschland AG. UBS Deutschland AG is regulated by the Bundesanstalt fur Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin). Spain: Prepared by UBS Limited and distributed by UBS Limited and UBS Securities España SV, SA. UBS Securit ies España SV, SA is regulated by the Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores (CNMV). Turkey: Distributed by UBS Limited. No information in this document is provided for the purpose of offering, marketing and sale by any means of any capital market instruments and services in the Republic of Turkey. Therefore, this document may not be considered as an offer made or to be made to residents of the Republic of Turkey. UBS AG is not licensed by the Turkish Capital Market Board under the provisions of the Capital Market Law (Law No. 6362). Accordingly, neither this document nor any other offering material related to the instruments/services may be utilized in connection with providing any capital market services to persons within the Republic of Turkey without the prior approval of the Capital Market Board. However, according to article 15 (d) (ii) of the Decree No. 32, there is no restriction on the purchase

or sale of the securit ies abroad by residents of the Republic of Turkey. Poland: Distributed by UBS Limited (spolka z ograniczona odpowiedzialnoscia) Oddzial w Polsce regulated by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority. Where an analyst of UBS Limited (spolka z ograniczona odpowiedzialnoscia) Oddzial w Polsce has contributed to this document, the document is also deemed to have been prepared by UBS Limited (spolka z ograniczona odpowiedzialnoscia) Oddzial w Polsce. Russia: Prepared

and distributed by UBS Bank (OOO). Switzerland: Distributed by UBS AG to persons who are institutional investors only. UBS AG is regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). Italy: Prepared by UBS Limited and distributed by UBS Limited and UBS Italia Sim S.p.A. UBS Italia Sim S.p.A. is regulated by the Bank of Italy and by the Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (CONSOB). Where an analyst of UBS Italia Sim S.p.A. has contributed to this document,

the document is also deemed to have been prepared by UBS Italia Sim S.p.A. South Africa: Distributed by UBS South Africa (Pty) Limited (Registration No. 1995 /011140 /07), an authorised user of the JSE and an authorised Financial Services Provider

(FSP 7328). Israel: This material is distributed by UBS Limited. UBS Limited is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority. UBS Securit ies Israel Ltd is a licensed Investment Marketer that is supervised by the Israel Securities Authority (ISA). UBS Limited and its affiliates inco rporated outside Israel are not licensed under the Israeli Advisory Law. UBS Limited is not covered by insurance as required from a licensee under the Israeli Advisory Law. UBS may engage among others in issuance of Financial Assets or in distribution of Financial Assets of other issuers for fees or other benefits. UBS Limited and its affiliates may prefer various Financial Assets to which they have or may have Affiliation (as such term is defined under the Israeli Advisory Law). Nothing in this Material should be considered as investment advice under the Israeli Advisory Law. This Material is being issued only to and/or is directed only at

persons who are Eligible Clients within the meaning of the Israeli Advisory Law, and this material must not be relied on or acted upon by any other persons. Saudi Arabia: This document has been issued by UBS AG (and/or any of its subsidiaries, branches or affiliates), a public company limited by shares, incorporated in Switzerland with its registered offices at Aesch envorstadt 1, CH-4051 Basel and Bahnhofstrasse 45, CH-8001 Zurich. This publication has been approved by UBS Saudi Arabia (a subsidiary of UBS AG), a Saudi closed joint stock company incorporated in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under commercial register number 1010257812 having its registered off ice at Tatweer Towers, P.O. Box 75724, Riyadh 11588, Kingdom of Saudi

Arabia. UBS Saudi Arabia is authorized and regulated by the Capital Market Authority to conduct securities business under license number 08113-37. Dubai: The information distributed by UBS AG Dubai Branch is intended for Professional Clients only

and is not for further distribution within the United Arab Emirates. United States: Distributed to US persons by either UBS Securities LLC or by UBS Financial Services Inc., subsidiaries of UBS AG; or by a group, subsidiary or affiliate of UBS AG that is not registered as a US broker-dealer (a ‘non-US affiliate’ ) to major US institutional investors only. UBS Securities LLC or UBS Financial Services Inc. accepts responsibility for the content of a document prepared by another non-US aff iliate when distributed to US persons by UBS Securities LLC or UBS Financial Services Inc. All transactions by a US person in the securit ies mentioned in this document must be effected through UBS Securities LLC or UBS Financial Services Inc., and not through a non-

US affiliate. Canada: Distributed by UBS Securities Canada Inc., a registered investment dealer in Canada and a Member-Canadian Investor Protection Fund, or by another affiliate of UBS AG that is registered to conduct business in Canada or is otherwise exempt from registration. Brazil: Except as otherwise specif ied herein, this material is prepared by UBS Brasil CCTVM S.A. to persons who are eligible investors residing in Brazil, which are considered to be: (i) f inancial institut ions, (ii) insurance f irms and investment capital companies, (iii) supplementary pension entities, (iv) entit ies that hold financial investments higher than R$300,000.00 and that confirm the status of qualif ied investors in writ ten, (v) investment funds, (vi) securit ies portfolio managers and securities consultants duly authorized by Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM), regarding their own investments, and (vii) social security systems created by the Federal Government, States, and Municipalities. Hong Kong:

Distributed by UBS Securities Asia Limited and/or UBS AG, Hong Kong Branch. Singapore: Distributed by UBS Securit ies Pte. Ltd. [MCI (P) 016 /09 /2014 and Co. Reg. No.: 198500648C] or UBS AG, Singapore Branch. Please contact UBS Securit ies Pte. Ltd., an exempt financial adviser under the Singapore Financial Advisers Act (Cap. 110); or UBS AG, Singapore Branch, an exempt financial adviser under the Singapore Financial Advisers Act (Cap. 110) and a wholesale bank licensed under the Singapore Banking Act (Cap. 19) regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, in respect of any matters arising from, or in connect ion w ith, the analysis or document. The recipients of this document represent and warrant that they are accredited and

institut ional investors as defined in the Securities and Futures Act (Cap. 289). Japan: Distributed by UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd. to professional investors (except as otherwise permitted). Where this document has been prepared by UBS Securit ies Japan Co., Ltd., UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd. is the author, publisher and distributor of the document. Distributed by UBS AG, Tokyo Branch to Professional Investors (except as otherwise permitted) in relation to foreign exchange and other banking

businesses when relevant. Australia: Clients of UBS AG: Distributed by UBS AG (Holder of Australian Financial Services License No. 231087). Clients of UBS Securit ies Australia Ltd: Distributed by UBS Securities Australia Ltd (Holder of Australian Financial Services License No. 231098). Clients of UBS Wealth Management Australia Ltd: Distributed by UBS Wealth Management Australia Ltd (Holder of Australian Financial Services Licence No. 231127). This Document contains general information and/or general advice only and does not constitute personal financial product advice. As such, the Information in this document has been prepared w ithout taking into account any investor’s objectives, financial situation or needs, and investors should, before acting on the Information, consider the appropriateness of the Information, having regard to their objectives, f inancial situation and needs. If the Information contained in this document relates to the acquisition, or potential acquisition of a particular f inancial product by a ‘Retail’ client as defined by section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001 where a Product Disclosure Statement would be required, the retail client should obtain and consider the Product Disclosure Statement relating to

the product before making any decision about whether to acquire the product. The UBS Securities Australia Limited Financial Services Guide is available at: www.ubs.com/ecs-research-fsg. New Zealand: Distributed by UBS New Zealand Ltd. The information and recommendations in this publication are provided for general information purposes only. To the extent that any such information or recommendations constitute f inancial advice, they do not take into account any person’s particular

financial situation or goals. We recommend that recipients seek advice specif ic to their circumstances from their f inancial advisor. Korea: Distributed in Korea by UBS Securit ies Pte. Ltd., Seoul Branch. This document may have been edited or

contributed to from time to time by aff iliates of UBS Securities Pte. Ltd., Seoul Branch. Malaysia: This material is authorized to be distributed in Malaysia by UBS Securities Malaysia Sdn. Bhd (Capital Markets Services License No.: CMSL/A0063/2007). This material is intended for professional/inst itutional clients only and not for distribution to any retail clients. India: Prepared by UBS Securities India Private Ltd. (Corporate Identity Number U67120MH1996PTC097299) 2/F, 2 North Avenue, Maker Maxity, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai (India) 400051. Phone: +912261556000. It provides brokerage services bearing SEBI Registration Numbers: NSE (Capital Market Segment): INB230951431, NSE (F&O Segment) INF230951431, NSE (Currency Derivatives Segment) INE230951431, BSE (Capital Market Segment) INB010951437; merchant banking services bearing SEBI Registration Number: INM000010809 and research services. UBS AG, its aff iliates or subsidiaries may have debt holdings or positions in the subject Indian company/companies. Within the past 12 months, UBS AG, its affiliates or subsidiaries may have received compensation for non-investment banking securities-related services and /or non-securit ies services from

the subject Indian company/companies. With regard to information on associates, please refer Annual Report at: http://www.ubs.com/global/en /about_ubs/investor_relat ions/annualreport ing.html

The disclosures contained in research documents produced by UBS Limited shall be governed by and construed in accordance with English law.

UBS specifically prohibits the redistribution of this document in whole or in part without the writ ten permission of UBS and UBS accepts no liability whatsoever for the actions of third parties in this respect. Images may depict objects or elements that are protected by third party copyright, trademarks and other intellectual property rights. © UBS 2015. The key symbol and UBS are among the registered and unregistered trademarks of UBS. All rights reserved.

Steve Lambert

EGM, Capital

Financing 15 July 2015

NAB is the first Australian bank to issue a Climate Bond – December 2014

2 Clean Energy Summit| Steve Lambert| 15 July 2015

NAB Treasury

(General Funds Pool)

Surplus Funds Climate Bond bank acct/ other

eligible investments

Portfolio of eligible Australian projects

The first bond issued by a bank globally to be

certified by the Climate Bonds Standards and

Certification Scheme

A senior unsecured NAB bond, with proceeds

asset-linked (i.e. ring fenced) for financing a

portfolio of renewable energy assets,

including wind farms and solar energy

facilities in Victoria, South Australia,

Tasmania, Western Australia, NSW and the

ACT

Supported by a lead cornerstone bid from

Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC)

• Cathedral Rocks Wind Farm

• Hallet 4 & 5

• Mumbida Wind Farm

• Musselroe Wind Farm

• New Gullen Range Wind

Farm

• Oaklands Hill

• Pacific Hydro Portland Wind

Farm

• Palisade Wind

• Pyrenees Wind Energy Dev

• Royalla Asset

• Wind Macarthur Finco

• Woolnorth Wind Farm

NAB Specialised Finance Climate Bond Cost Centre

Wind

3GW

• A’Chruach Wind Farm (UK)

• Middlewick Wind Farm (UK)

• Infinis Wind Farm Portfolio (UK)

• Waubra Wind Farm (AUS)

• Portland Wind Energy Project (AUS)

• TRIG Portfolio (UK/FRA/ROI)

Boreas Offshore Wind Farm (EUR)

Geothermal

562MW

• Sarulla Geothermal (Indo)

• Mighty River Power (NZ)

• Tauhara North (NZ)

Solar PV

57MW

• Broxted Solar (UK)

• Royalla Solar Farm (AUS)

Others1

1020MW

• Transfield Services (AUS)

• Viridis Commercial Property (UK)

• MEIF Landfill Gas (UK)

NAB – Renewable Energy Commitment in figures


Successfully financed most proven renewable energy technologies

Renewables projects financed by NAB– Regions

Australia: 2.32GW (50%)

NZ: 232MW (5%)

4.63GW Renewable assets project financed by

NAB worldwide since 2003

Europe: 1.75GW (38%)

Asia: 330MW (7%)

A$3.75bn Debt committed by NAB

for renewables assets

A$1.4bn in

Europe

A$2.4bn in

APAC

Renewables projects financed by NAB– Technologies

1. Portfolio of renewable assets (wind, hydro, land fill gas, solar PV)

NAB – Renewable Energy Commitment in figures


NAB is

committed to

the renewable

energy sector

and has made

a strong

commitment

to address the

issue of

climate

change

Current Commitments

total A$1.58bn

29 renewable deals on

our book (3.93GW)

Delivered significant

value to FICC

(RPI/IRS/FX)

Issued A$300m 7-year

NAB green bond

Led first USPP for an

Australian renewable

energy asset

Active across most

proven technologies

-

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

de

bt a

rra

ng

ed

(A

$b

n)

Insta

lled

Cap

acity (

MW

)

Cumulative Installed Capacity / Debt arranged by NAB for renewable projects

Wind Solar Biomass Geothermal Portfolio LFG

Market trends and outlook Chloe Munro, Chair and CEO

Legislative changes

> New target of 33 000 GWh and a new trajectory

> Emissions-intensive trade-exposed industries will be fully exempt

> Native wood-waste will be an eligible fuel source

> Removal of two yearly reviews

Additional reporting by the Clean Energy Regulator:

> Annual statement.

Clean Energy Summit, July 2015


The new trajectory


> The Department of the Environment estimates around

4900 MW of wind and 750 MW utility scale solar

required to meet the target. > The Clean Energy Council estimates there are approximately

6600 MW of approved projects.

Future build: achieving the new target


Growth in commercial and industrial solar


Emissions Reduction Fund opportunities

www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au

Renewable energy developments in the EU: an update

Scott Wyatt

Delegation of the European Union to Australia

European Union

EU 28: working together… • CO2 standards for cars • Appliance labelling • Horizon 2020 • One voice in UNFCCC • Binding energy and climate targets, standards, policies,

goals… • Energy Performance of Buildings Directive • Etc etc etc…

20/20/20

• 20% renewable energy

• 20% improvement in energy efficiency

• 20% emissions reduction target by 2020 from 1990

GHG emissions

GHG intensity

Renewable Energy Directive

• Binding targets on each Member State

• 20% + 10% in transport

Support schemes

16 June: Renewable Energy Progress Report

• Projected share of 15.3% in 2014

• 25/28 Member States expected to meet 2013-14 interim targets

• 26% of electricity generation from RES

• RES jobs: over 1.15m

• 5.7% renewables in transport

EU Emissions Trading Scheme

putting a pric€ on carbon…

European Council: Headline targets

2030 Climate and Energy Framework

2020

2030

New governance system + key indicators

-20 % Greenhouse Gas

Emissions

20% Renewable

Energy

20 % Energy

Efficiency

40 % Greenhouse Gas

Emissions

27 % Renewable Energy

27% Energy

Efficiency

15 % Interconnection

10 % Interconnection

Agreement reached on ETS / non-ETS split

EU ETS: carbon price here to stay

• Cap (linear reduction factor) ↑from 1.74% to 2.2% from 2021

• New Market Stability Reserve

• "Backloaded" 900m allowances to go into MSR

• NER 400

Energy strategy and Energy Union

Paris UNFCCC CoP

• Momentum's building…

• EU INDC submitted 6 March ≥ 40% by 2030

• Agreement needs to be: ambitious (2deg); legally binding; applicable to all; underpinned by transparency; dynamic in allowing ↑Parties' commitments in line with long-term goal.

Thank you.

RENEWABLE INVESTMENT: ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE THE GAMBLE?Australian Clean Energy Summit 2015

Kobad Bhavnagri

15 July 2014

1

200 EXPERTS ACROSS SIX CONTINENTS

San Francisco

Washington DC

Sao Paulo

Cape Town Sydney

Singapore

ZurichMunich

London

New Delhi Hong Kong

TokyoBeijing

SeoulNew York

North America40

SouthAmerica5

Europe90

Africa30

AsiaPacific35

2

2,500 CLIENTS IN OVER 50 COUNTRIES

The logos listed do not represent a full client list. They are illustrative of the organizations we have worked with in the past.

Public Sector & NGOs

Finance & Investment

Supply Chain &Technology

Utilities & Energy

https://www.clpgroup.com/Pages/home.aspx

http://www.hudsoncep.com/index.php

http://www.vpcp.com/

3

Quarterly LRET Market Outlooks

PRODUCTS TO HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THE FUTURE OF ENERGY IN AUSTRALIA

Solar OtherRenewables

AdvancedTransport

Energy Smart TechnologiesWind Gas Carbon &

RECs Markets

Small-scale PV + storage uptake forecasts

Wind & solar project pipeline analysis

Levelised cost of energy analysis

APAC LNG market analysis

Analyst access, roundtables & exclusive events

Carbon policy & market analysis

Long-term power sector outlooks

Utility strategy updates

4

MAIN THEMES

The outlook for large-scale renewables is uncertain. Under current market conditions financing new assets is very difficult, as there is a high degree of uncertainty on revenue post-2020. This could threaten the viability of the LRET.

But long-term fundamentals suggest Australia simply has to do something serious about power sector emissions. That should strongly benefit renewables. The question is: what, how and when? And more critically, are you willing to take a gamble on it?

Australia’s rollout of renewables will continue, but the surest bet is behind the meter. Distributed technologies are now an unstoppable force.

5

FORECAST CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTED CAPACITY, 2015-40

Source: Bloomberg New Energy finance

SMALL-SCALE PV (GW) ENERGY STORAGE (GWH)

4.8

10.1

15.9

21.5

28.0

36.8

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Residential Commercial Industrial

0.0 0.41.7

6.0

17.0

33.3

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

6

Note: LCOE does not consider the value streams of the system (avoided retail charges and feed-in tariff credit). Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

LEVELISED COST OF ELECTRICITY FROM A RESIDENTIAL 4KW PV + VARIOUS EUSCONFIGURATIONS IN QUEENSLAND (AUD C/KWH)

Retail tariff

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2020 2025 2030

7



PV (no storage)

Retail tariff

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2020 2025 2030

8



PV (no storage)

Retail tariff

1kWh

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2020 2025 2030

9



PV (no storage)

Retail tariff

1kWh

3kWh

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2020 2025 2030

10



PV (no storage)

Retail tariff

1kWh

3kWh5kWh

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2020 2025 2030

11



PV (no storage)

Retail tariff

1kWh

3kWh5kWh

10kWh

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2020 2025 2030

12

SUPPLY-DEMAND BALANCE IN THE LRET

● 19.3TWh of new supply required to meet the LRET in 2020

● Banked LGCs enough to meet demand until the end of 2017

● 6.6GW of new renewables required to meet the target

● We expect around 3.4GW of new wind, 3.2GW of large-scale PV

Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020Existing capacity Committed capacityBanked LGCs supply Gross Demand

Net demand

Note: Includes voluntary demand

13

Policy risk● Is the Coalition really committed to the policy, or could the party

attempt further changes if the politics permit? ● Will a buyer’s strike force further policy change?

Market risk● LGC prices (will they have value after 2020?)● Electricity demand (will it continue to decline?)● Wholesale electricity prices (how confident can you be?)

PROCURING A 15 YEAR PPA WILL BE DIFFICULT

14

Note: Example of a Tier 1 wind project in Tasmania. Assumes wind receives a 10% discount to the wholesale pool price and that LGC price post-2020 is set by the marginal cost of a new large-scale entrant. Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

COST VS REVENUE FOR A WIND FARM: POST-2020 LGC PRICE SET BY NEW LARGE-SCALE ENTRANT (AUD/MWH)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Forecast LGC price

Wholesale electricity price

Required offtake price for new wind

Revenue shortfall

15

Note: Example of a Tier 1 wind project in Tasmania. Assumes wind receives a 10% discount to the wholesale pool price and that LGC price post-2020 declines uniformly to zero. Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

COST VS REVENUE FOR A WIND FARM: POST-2020 LGC PRICE DECLINES TO ZERO (AUD/MWH)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Forecast LGC price



Revenue shortfall

16

Note: Example of a Tier 1 wind project in Tasmania. Assumes wind receives a 10% discount to the wholesale pool price, which stays at 2020 levels to 2030. LGC price post-2020 is set by the marginal cost of a new large-scale entrant. Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

COST VS REVENUE FOR A WIND FARM: FLAT WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY PRICE (AUD/MWH)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Forecast LGC price



Revenue shortfall

17

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Solar thermal

Small-scale PV

Utility-scale PV

Offshore wind

Onshore wind

Biomass/WtE

Geothermal

Hydro

Nuclear

Oil

Gas

Coal


AUSTRALIA POWER GENERATION BY TECHNOLOGY, 2012-40 (TWH)

17% renewable

83% fossil-fuel

Note: renewable generation includes large-scale hydro

18

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Solar thermal

Small-scale PV

Utility-scale PV

Offshore wind

Onshore wind

Biomass/WtE

Geothermal

Hydro

Nuclear

Oil

Gas

Coal




27% renewable

73% fossil-fuel

19

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Solar thermal

Small-scale PV

Utility-scale PV

Offshore wind

Onshore wind

Biomass/WtE

Geothermal

Hydro

Nuclear

Oil

Gas

Coal




37% renewable

63% fossil-fuel

20

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Solar thermal

Small-scale PV

Utility-scale PV

Offshore wind

Onshore wind

Biomass/WtE

Geothermal

Hydro

Nuclear

Oil

Gas

Coal




59%

41%

21

New CCGT

New coal

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029

Note: Coal and CCGT prices exclude carbon costs. Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

2015-30 WIND LCOE VS COAL AND GAS IN AUSTRALIA (REAL 2015 AUD/MWH)

22

Refurbished Coal

Refurbished CCGTNew CCGT

New coal

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029



23

Refurbished Coal

Refurbished CCGTNew CCGT

New coal

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029



Operating cost of existing coal

24

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Life extension

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Muja C

Worsley

Muja D

Gladstone

Eraring

Collie

Callide B

Mt Piper

Technical life


ASSUMED LIFE EXTENSION OF COAL GENERATORS (YEARS)

Life extension = 8GW Coal

25

AUSTRALIA POWER SECTOR CO2 EMISSIONS, 2012-40 (MtCO2e)


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

2016: Emissions rise to a peak of 186Mt (6% above 2000 levels) as coal generation rebounds

26



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

2020: Emissions fall as renewable generation increases to 2% below 2000 levels

27



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

2020-30: Emissions remain stubbornly high as coal utilisation climbs (9% below 2000 levels in 2030)

28



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

2036-40: Emissions finally fall to 41% below 2000 levels, as substantial amounts of coal reach end of life

29

HERE’S THE RUB…

Something has to be done about power-sector emissions post-2020, if Australia is to commit to any meaningful target.

This should be good for renewables.

But are you willing to take that gamble?

Or will the offtaker?

30

Source: Bloomberg, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, company filings

SHARE OF DIFFERENT VALUE SEGMENTS, BY UTILITY

23% 24%

11%19%

13%

30%Total = 47%

Total = 74%

Total = 10% Total = 7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Generation capacity Retail customers Large-scale renewablecapacity

Small-scale PVinstallations

AGL Energy EnergyAustralia Origin Energy Other

31

This publication is the copyright of Bloomberg New Energy Finance. No portion of this document may be photocopied, reproduced, scanned into an electronic system or transmitted, forwarded or distributed in any way without prior consent of Bloomberg New Energy Finance.The information contained in this publication is derived from carefully selected sources we believe are reasonable. We do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness and nothing in this document shall be construed to be a representation of such a guarantee. Any opinions expressed reflect the current judgment of the author of the relevant article or features, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, Bloomberg Finance L.P., Bloomberg L.P. or any of their affiliates ("Bloomberg"). The opinions presented are subject to change without notice. Bloomberg accepts no responsibility for any liability arising from use of this document or its contents. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed as an offering of financial instruments, or as investment advice or recommendations by Bloomberg of an investment strategy or whether or not to "buy," "sell" or "hold" an investment.

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER

Unique analysis, tools and data for decision-makers driving change in the energy system

[email protected]

MARKETS Renewable EnergyEnergy Smart TechnologiesAdvanced TransportGas Carbon and RECs

SERVICESAmericas ServiceAsia Pacific ServiceEMEA ServiceApplied Research Events and Workshops

Kobad [email protected]

Image courtesy of Gensler

Image courtesy of Tesla Motors

Images courtesy of Normal

Image courtesy of Tesla

Images courtesy of Pinoccio

Image courtesy of Local Motors Inc.

Image courtesy of Georgia Institute of Technology

© 2015 Autodesk

“Cleantech innovators should have

incredibly powerful design tools

for solving the world's most

difficult environmental problems.”

Autodesk Entrepreneur Impact &

Cleantech Partner Program

© 2015 Autodesk

Image courtesy of Unchartered Play

Video courtesy of Unchartered Play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8SnqImNv74

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8SnqImNv74

© 2015 Autodesk

Image Courtesy of Unchartered Play

© 2015 Autodesk

Additional Resources

© 2015 Autodesk

Contact

Navin Kumar Market Development Manager, Cleantech & Entrepreneur Impact,

ASEAN & ANZ

[email protected]

@navinkumarsg

#navinspeaks

Big problems

ENERGY FLAGSHIP

Adam Berry | Research Group Leader

Thank you Adam Berry Research Group Leader Energy Modelling, Analysis and Optimisation [email protected]

ENERGY FLAGSHIP

Image references:

Suburb: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Markham-suburbs_id.jpg

Graveyard: https://www.flickr.com/photos/duncanh1/8528456387

Crowd: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jamescridland/613445810/

Rain: https://www.flickr.com/photos/duncanh1/4872194918/

All others are public domain.

Raising the bar: national roundtable on product quality Mark Williamson, Executive General Manager

Clean Energy Summit 2015 2

Our role: economic regulator with an environmental objective

The Clean Energy Regulator Accelerating carbon abatement for Australia

Clean Energy Regulator inspections programme


“The Regulator must ensure that each year a statistically significant selection of small generation units that were installed during the year are inspected.”

“If, during an inspection, the inspector considers that there is an imminent safety risk to a person or to property from a small generation unit on the premises, the inspector must immediately notify all interested parties of the extent and nature of the safety risk.”

Renewable Energy (Electricity) Regulations 2001

Renewable Energy Target Inspection Advisory Committee


Key recommendations regarding DC isolators: > Review of the clause that requires a roof top DC isolator > Training courses for installers > Introduction of new installation requirements

Members: > Clean Energy Regulator > State and Territory Regulators > Peak industry bodies

Small-scale installation compliance


Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme Australian standards

State and territory electrical regulators Clean Energy Council module list Clean Energy Council accredited

installer Clean Energy Regulator inspections

programme

Compulsory Australian standards,

State and territory electrical regulators

Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme inspections


SINCE 2011, 4.0% INSTALLATIONS UNSAFE,

AND 15.4% INSTALLATIONS SUBSTANDARD

The number of small-scale systems found to be unsafe or substandard has reduced since the start of the inspections

program in 2011

OVER 80% OF UNSAFE AND SUBSTANDARD

SYSTEMS RELATE TO DC ISOLATOR ISSUES


Is there a systemic issue? How can industry give the community confidence and expose bad performers?

Deeming period decline for solar PV


Year system was installed Deeming period in years before 2016 15

2016 15 2017 14 2018 13 2019 12 2020 11 2021 10 2022 9 2023 8 2024 7 2025 6 2026 5 2027 4 2028 3 2029 2 2030 1

At which point will we see a substantial drop in systems claiming STCs?

Raising the bar National roundtable on product quality

2

About RFI

Founded in 1979

Focus on solar and wireless markets

Australia’s most experienced solar

distributor

Staff with over 200 years of solar

engineering

Culture of safety & best practice

Offices and warehousing across

Australia

Comprehensive range of world class

brands

ISO9001 for over 20 years

What does poor quality look like?

3

The quality challenge for solar

4

• Long performance expected

• DC electrical systems

exposed the elements

• Million + small sites, not solar

farms

• Changing technology, supply

chain and standards

“The most common issue experienced by CHOICE members was a problem with their inverter, with 10% of inverters requiring replacement, the majority in the first five years of installation.”

Choice Survey January 2015

Regulatory environment

5

State Electrical

Regs

Consumer law and

warranty

State Worksafe

Regs

Tax Law, treatment

of STC

Standards AS5033,

IEC62109

ORER STCs

Retailers exemption

Privacy Act

Wheeling agreements

Defamation law

NEM rules

NCCP responsible

lending

Import duties

and Reg

Council Req

ERAC & EESS

Building code

NUELAC Trade Lic.

Utility Perm to connect

reqs

How is it done overseas?

6

• Japan: High technical barriers to

entry

• US: Separate UL certification

requirement and 3rd party ownership

models

• Europe: Anti-dumping has had an

effect

• UK: Industry Assurance programs

and Independent Warranty

Association

What’s happening now

7

• CEC Solar PV Retailer Code of Conduct

• ASC Positive Quality / Solar Gold Program

• Relisting requirement for inverters driven by

standards release

• CEC update of delisting procedure for

inverters and modules

• Serial number tracking proposal for modules

with renewable energy regulator and CEC

• PPA and lease starting to see economics of

quality

What’s around the corner

8

• On grid battery storage is yet to be regulated

• Whilst lead acid has been considered in

existing regulations, Lithium will open up more

opportunities and hazards

• Near term prices mean that demand for lower

cost solution is high and may lead to poor

quality solutions proliferating

• The potential for storage over the next decade

is large but regulatory / industry control will be

needed to avoid accidents and dangerous

installations

Thank you

16th July 2015, Scott Partlin

BANKABLE INVERTER SOLUTIONS: SMA‘S EXPERIENCES PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING QUALITY INVERTERS

SMA Solar Technology AG

• SMA has had a physical Australian presence since 2007.

• More inverters installed in Australia than any other manufacturer (~25%)

350,000 units, 1.2 GW

• Local Service support (feedback from the ground). • Warranty data, fed back to production.

• Globally SMA has been making inverters since 1981.

• 35GW installed globally. • ~1 in 3 inverters on the planet are SMA.

• SMA are well placed to understand and comment on issues related to quality.

SMA’s EXPERIENCE – AUSTRALIA AND GLOBAL

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

SMA Inverter - Australian Installs

TRAINING AND INSTALLATION SUPPORT ≈ SYSTEM QUALITY

• CEC requires certain competencies before certifying an installer.

• SMA operates Solar Academy to ensure products are understood and hence designed with and correctly installed (very important in early years, and becoming important again as storage increases prevalence).

• SMA supply detailed documentation, including all components, in the box with each inverter to ensure an installation can be completed correctly and safely.

• SMA operate an Australian-based service support line, staffed by tertiary qualified PV & electrical engineers, available to provide commissioning and product support, leading to highest level of install quality for the consumer.

• Given inverters are the most complex and highest performance risk component in a PV system, should either specific product training or local phone support be mandated?

• Since 1995, SMA products have had ability to collect data and report performance.

• The internet changed things for all businesses, including Renewable Energy and inverters. Free web based monitoring with Sunny Portal introduced in 2005.

• Reporting system performance helps the system owner ensure their investment in PV is not wasted.

• Low incidence of system monitoring in Australia. Only ~2% of SMA systems on Sunny Portal.

Reasons given by installers are that they are under cost pressures from system re-sellers and consumers, that installing monitoring reduces their margins and ability to compete.

• Should industry make system monitoring a requirement to protect consumer’s investment?

• Utility operators and Regulators could use data for benefit of public better managing the grid.

SYSTEM MONITORING – PERFORMANCE REPORTING

AFTER SALES SERVICE, REMOTE MONITORING

• Systems with monitoring have increased ability for remote diagnosis. This can:

Reduce the cost of a service truck roll.

Restore system performance sooner.

• Electric power grid generation assets are monitored for performance and are regularly serviced to ensure they operate correctly and can be controlled:

Are embedded generation assets any different?

Power grids change, assets need to change with them. Do embedded generators need to have this ability if they are part of the grid?

• Should we as an industry impose requirements related to PV system maintenance or remote fault diagnosis/service to better protect Australian consumers and businesses?

• Should embedded PV generators be considered any different to central generators?

PRODUCTION & DEVELOPMENT TESTING

• All SMA production lines do multiple points of inline testing, including “burn-in” tests to best ensure:

Inverters are manufactured and are operating correctly.

No dead-on-arrival.

Minimise infant failures in the “burn-in” phase of “bathtub curve”.

• SMA undertake extreme testing during development and on-going production. This is critical to ensure:

A product’s long term reliability.

Customer expectations for quality are met.

• What tests are critical?

• Should high temperature testing be required for inverters in Australia?

• Should end of line testing documentation be required?

WARRANTY FAILURE ANALYSIS

• SMA record and track warranty data (including all serial numbers)

By product series / model / failure mode

• This information is used:

Locally to determine warranty pool stock holdings.

By product managers to manage their product / development / EoL.

Finance (ensure adequate warranty provision, € cf. Failure Rate).

To protect Australian consumers and businesses.

• Should warranty reporting and financial warranty provision make up part of our industry compliance and oversight?

• Should such information be provided to the CEC to better protect Australian consumers?

IMPROVED ELECTRICAL SAFETY FOR AUSTRALIA– IEC 62109

• New electrical safety standard mandated ( but was it too late?).

• Re-listing has provided CEC an opportunity to improve lifetime quality for inverters installed henceforth.

• Reduced margins and increased competition has led to accretion within the inverter industry.

• This has been good and bad for the industry. Good since now only higher quality and safer inverters are available in the market.

Bad because there are now many manufacturers no longer operating in Australia to honour consumer's warranties and ensure STC’s obligations for a system are met.

• Can we afford to rely only on regulation, or must we impose a higher standard to better protect Australian consumers, businesses and the long term interest of our industry?

Before IEC 62109 After IEC 62109

Inverters CEC Listed 2509 870 (⇩65%)

Manufacturers CEC Listed 212 57 (⇩73%)

SMA Inverters 75 35 (⇩46%)

SOCIAL MEDIA www.SMA.de/Newsroom

21.07.2015

Solar Storage; Challenges & Opportunities

DC Coupled AC Coupled

AC Input

AC Output

Inverter/Charger Switchboard And Metering

Inverter Regulator

Switching

Std Loads

Battery & Enclosure Fusing

Micro Micro Micro Micro Micro

Coms

Coms

Coms

Coms Coms

Coms

Coms

Coms

UPS Loads

Coms

Introduction

• Solar and EV industry

advocate

• Award winning service

provision

• Business coaching and

training

• Product development,

launch strategies

• Industry research & analysis

21 years in solar and storage!

Client’s, partners, friends and collaborators

“Is storage real?”

The most common question I get is:

“Is storage real yet?”

My answer today is:

“It’s so real, I am in the market.

Announced yesterday that I have

joined a solar company as CEO and storage will

form part of our offer”

Five major challenges

Challenge #1

Will this really happen?

PROOF TEST?: • 2009; 5k system was $20k • Equiv. volume: 15,000 sales

• 2010; 5Kw system was $10k • Equiv. volume: 77,000 sales

Challenge #2

Many market segments

Challenge #3

Early days for products = huge disparity

Challenge #4

Understanding the sensitivities and regulations can reduce snake oil sales

Challenge #5

Selling this properly ain’t easy

Opportunities?

• Stronger network

• Smarter grid

• Increased load

• Improvements in data & monitoring

• EV’s as storage

• Network level storage

Thank you & so long for now.

July 2015

Storage-as-a-Service … and other ways of enhancing the value proposition of storage

The Australian Clean Energy Summit

2

Exploring Three Scenarios for Energy Storage

• Energy storage holds great promise for the electricity industry and sizeable investments are being made to reduce the cost of storage

• BUT - how can the value proposition be improved by increasing available benefits?

• This presentation explores three different scenarios:

1. The Impact of Tariffs

2. Alternative Business models

3. Restructuring of Subsidies

3

1. The Impact of Tariffs – Three Different Tariffs Modelled

• Tariffs modelled:

• Flat energy charge ($/kWh)

• Time-of-Use (ToU)

• A seasonal (Dec – Feb) monthly maximum demand (MD) tariff with a kWh residual

• Utilising interval data from the rewards-based tariff (RBT) trial

• Each customer is provided with 3kW solar PV and $0.08/kWh FiT

4

1. The Impact of Tariffs – The Storage Algorithm

• Storage system set to charge (from excess solar and grid where required) during the day

• Discharge during peak (4pm – 8pm)

-0.40

-0.20

-

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

Avera

ge H

alf

-ho

ur

kW

h

BAU Load Solar Storage Net Load

Energy stored

Peak reduction

5

1. The Impact of Tariffs – Demand Tariffs are the Answer

• The annual gross benefit (bill reduction) of storage under different tariffs

• Not including the cost of the storage solution

• Greatest benefit available under a MD tariff due to high peak charge

• Highlights the importance of an appropriate tariff offer to the storage business case

Gross Benefit ($) SUM SITE0003 SITE0037 SITE0064 SITE0095 SITE0096 SITE0113 SITE0168 SITE0172 SITE0192 SITE0203

Flat Rate 1,195$ 158$ 182$ 58$ 139$ 128$ 118$ 116$ 77$ 123$ 96$

TOU 1,699$ 234$ 251$ 106$ 192$ 169$ 162$ 159$ 133$ 164$ 129$

MD 3,967$ 527$ 488$ 528$ 448$ 289$ 482$ 331$ 313$ 287$ 273$

Gross Benefit (%) SUM SITE0003 SITE0037 SITE0064 SITE0095 SITE0096 SITE0113 SITE0168 SITE0172 SITE0192 SITE0203

Flat Rate 8% 10% 11% 4% 9% 11% 10% 8% 3% 9% 13%

TOU 12% 15% 16% 7% 14% 15% 14% 11% 7% 13% 15%

MD 21% 21% 21% 21% 23% 21% 22% 20% 18% 20% 26%

6

2. Business Models – Introducing “Storage-as-a-service”

Exports @ 8c/kWh

Peak consumption @ $x/kWh

Customer Value Proposition:

“Access all of your solar exports at peak times for a monthly fee”

Customer saves $ by using stored energy during peak

SaaS Payment @ $y/kWh / $y/month

7

2. Business Models – Storage-as-a-Service vs. Residential Storage

• Modelling designed to test the viability of storage-as-a-service vs. residential storage for a customer with solar PV on a MD tariff

Assumptions:

• Network storage assumed @ $1,200/kWh + comms and metering

• Assumes that installation and maintenance can be recovered

• Further assumes that the storage-as-a-service operator collects a return on investment of at least 10%

• Residential storage modelled based on 7kWh storage (Tesla Powerwall)

8

2. Business Models – Storage-as-a-Service More Cost-Efficient

• Graph shows the annual net benefit for customers with solar PV investing in a storage solution

• On average (black bars), storage-as-a-service is on par with solar PV customers doing nothing - an additional incentive would be required to make the offer attractive to customers

• Residential storage more expensive as not optimally sized – under SaaS customers only pay for the storage required

-$700

-$600

-$500

-$400

-$300

-$200

-$100

$-

$100

$200

$300A

vera

ge 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

An

nu

al

Net

Ben

efi

t

Residential Storage Storage-as-a-Service

9

2. Business Models – Storage-as-a-service: Benefits and Barriers

Benefits to DNSPs

• Partial RAB asset

• Additional revenue source

• Encourages grid connection

• Utilises core skills – asset ownership, asset management, network connectivity, metering, meter data management.

• Economies of scale and demand “optimisation”

Benefits to Retailers

• 1.5 million customers potentially interested in this product

• An additional bundled services to create sticky customers

Benefits to Customers

• Greater control of electricity costs

• Less impact on the customer

• No space or safety issues

Barriers

• Ownership and benefits capture – the storage-as-a-service solution would require partnerships between networks and retailers – both would want the asset on the balance sheet.

• Pricing – VNM and local network charges (wheeling) would be required as well as appropriate pricing incentives

• Technology maturity and suitability – would require reliable storage technology, comms and virtual-net-metering. Residential storage also be more suitable for network support as closer to loads.

10

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

ACT NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA

Source: CEC, Clean Energy Report 2014

Number of Installations and Timing of FiT

Feed in tariffs have been a key driver of early solar PV uptake

• The premium feed-in tariff has been closed to new solar PV customer since July 2012 (in QLD)

• A report by the Queensland Competition Authority in 2013 estimated the remaining value of the regulated feed-in tariff subsidy to be $2.9bn at that time (QCA, Mar 13)

Source: CEC, Clean Energy Report 2014

3. Restructuring Subsidies – The Current Landscape

Premium FiT Expiry Date Number of household and commercial solar PV system installations by state (up to 100kW)

Source: AECOM - Presentation to Australian Energy Storage Conference, June 2014

Source: AECOM - Presentation to Australian Energy Storage Conference, June 2014

11

• The legacy premium feed-in tariffs provide a significant disincentive for storage and dilutes the intended impact of cost-reflective network pricing

• An option exists to transfer this existing, committed subsidy to support the uptake of demand management technology (including storage)

• This technology has the additional benefit of enabling reduced network expenditure (by reducing the technical impacts of solar PV and peak demand), hence putting downward pressure on electricity prices for all

Extensive work would be required to define the details of such an approach to avoid “unintended consequences” and ensure that appropriate standards and customer protections are in place.

Sta

keh

old

er

sati

sfact

ion

Solar PV owners

Other Customers

Networks

Retailers

7kWh storage breakeven total cost (Queensland Example Customer)

3. Restructuring Subsidies – The Opportunity

-$10,380

$1,931 $2,636

-$5,309

$6,102 $6,965

-$12,000

-$10,000

-$8,000

-$6,000

-$4,000

-$2,000

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$0.44 FiT $0.06 FiT $0.44 FiTPayout

$0.44 FiT $0.06 FiT $0.44 FiTPayout

Flat Rate Maximum Demand

Sto

rag

e B

reakev

en

(T

ota

l C

ost)

12

About MHC

Our Philosophy

The MHC philosophy, validated and reinforced by our work for clients around the world, holds that the value (V) of a consulting intervention rests on three cornerstones:

MHC is a management consulting firm determined to make a difference by serving the needs of the energy and water sectors in Australia.

Our quarterly journal, QSI Online, shares our insights with the industries we serve and empowers businesses with high quality, content-rich and contemporary information relevant to their industry.

Read it at www.marchmenthill.com/qsi-online

Marchment Hill Consulting

Level 4, 530 Lonsdale Street

Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia

Phone: +61 3 9602 5604

Fax: +61 3 9642 5626

http://www.marchmenthill.com/qsi-online







Australian Clean Energy Summit

16/7/15

Market Opportunity

Where we started 5 years ago.

1. Transmission and Distribution (“T&D”) investment deferral – The ZBM has the ability to shift electricity from the off-peak period to the peak period (early evenings) and so defer the need for expensive upgrades of the wires, poles and substations that make up the electricity grid.

2. Renewable integration – One issue with renewable generation is the lack of control around the timing of generation – we cannot control the wind or the sun. The ZBM has the ability to shift renewable energy generation from when it is generated to when it is required, increasing utilisation of renewable energy sources and stabilising electricity networks.

3. Energy Management – At the residential and commercial level, managing electricity demand from the grid by using the ZBM as an electricity buffer is an opportunity that is now generating significant interest because of the potential to reduce electricity bills. The Smart grid trial with Ausgrid in New South Wales, which RedFlow is part of, is an example of how this can change the way we use electricity.

4. Remote power opportunities - Electrification of remote areas not currently connected to the electricity grid is a large potential opportunity. The ZBM combined with renewable energy sources has the ability to power these remote sites, and so reduce the use of diesel generators. Powering the large number of mobile phone towers needed to support the growth in mobile phone usage in remote areas is an attractive niche market.

Still consistent message within the industry

Estimate of US market for (grid-connected) electricity storage

$8.4 billion at 6 GW at $1400/kWh

$16.1 billion at 23 GW at $700/kWh

Application & Storage Type

Source: Electric Power Research Institute 2010

Energy Storage use is evolving

4 years ago small number of trials, searching for an application

Energy Storage Work on Defining Applications

CPUC has completed a piece of work which provided a high level template from which to build the business case for use of Energy Storage

Southern Cal also produced an number of papers for stacking Energy Storage benefits

Energy Storage moving on from trials

Dresden 2MW/2.7MWh – Frequency Regulation

Leighton Buzzard 6MW/10MWh - Frequency Regulation & Peak Shaving (Network Asset life extension)

Energy Storage 2015

• AES Energy Storage Announces 260 MW of Interconnected Global Projects in Construction or Late Stage Development

• NEC to Deploy 60MW of Energy Storage in PJM

• Tesla Fields 40,000 Reservations for Battery Storage

• Alevo promises 200MW of grid storage projects to back its batteries

Energy Storage couple to Growth in Renewables

On the left 2012, the right 2015 - 3.2GW Solar Gobi Desert driving an estimated 130GW of Energy Storage needed in China

Energy Storage Rapid growth since 2006

DOE GLOBAL ENERGY STORAGE DATABASE

Energy Storage Batteries - New Projects

Energy Storage Applications Expanding

Energy Storage where is Australia

Globally 582 Projects

Australia 21 Projects Operational:

• 6 Pump Hydro

• 2 Electro Mechanical

• 2 Thermal

• 11 Electro Chemistry

Total 2,552 MW of generation:

• 2,541 MW is Pump Hydro

• 11MW the rest.

“Micro Grid market for military, communities and resource applications are anticipated to grow 5 fold from today till 2020. This is expected to

materialised in developed and developing countries with continued growth in the developing countries through to 2035”

Markets and drivers for this remarkable growth include: • Military Bases & Government Facilities • Cyber & Energy Security • Campuses, Universities, Research Parks, Data Centres & Server Farms • Critical Services: Hospitals, Airports & Public Transportation • Utilities, Grid Resiliency, Reliability & Demand Response • Islands, Remote Communities & Installations • Smart Cities, Buildings & Electric Vehicles • Energy Storage & Distributed Energy Projects

A Whole other Story - Micro Grids

Demonstration installations

Australia

The University of Queensland (36 ZBMs Zero to grid Building)

Research with University of NSW

USA

Caribbean Telco

Military

Europe

Global Electrical

Global Energy

Asia

Mobile Telcom’s

Ownership

Listed in Australia (ASX:RFX)

57 staff (2 in USA, 2 Europe)

RedFlow Locations

Mexico factory

USA Sales – Austin TX, European Sales – Munich, Germany

Brisbane, Australia (IP development & prototyping)

What we make

Packaged flowing electrolyte batteries

Zinc bromine battery module (ZBMs)

3 kW peak and 10 kWh

All plastic construction

Light

700+ ZBMs manufactured since 2009

Key partnerships developing

• Raytheon

• EMERSON Network Power

• PowerCo (NZ)

• SMS Technology

• Schneider

• Probe

• Blue Sky Energy

RedFlow corporate overview

Storage Safety Performance Study - progress update

CET ENERGY TECHNOLOGY

Sam Behrens 16th July 2015

Clean Energy Council (CEC) put out a request for proposal for a Storage Safety Performance Study – CSIRO was successfully awarded

Study forms part of CEC’s Future Proofing in Australia’s Distribution Industry (FPDI) project. The FPDI project is a collaborative project involving the CEC, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA), CEC’s members and other key stakeholders.

Further details see http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/policy-advocacy/arena/FPDI-project.html

Context

CSIRO | Storage Safety Performance Study - progress update | Sam Behrens

http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/policy-advocacy/arena/FPDI-project.html







• Project will provide expert advice on the “best practice” for safety of battery storage technologies.

• Work will assess Australian market conditions and standards relating to the safety battery storage and disposal, as well as accreditation of residential and commercial battery installations.

• Project scope will only consider stationary storage less than 200kWh in size. This aligns with other CEC standard’s work.

• Study will advise industry, prospective investors and users of battery technologies of best practice.

Project objective


RO 1: Storage Safety Performance Desktop Study (Technical Report)

Technical report (or literature review) will consider battery materials, battery installations, installer accreditations, standards and codes, best practices, provide a high-level gap-analysis, concluding remarks and recommendations

RO 2: Storage Safety Consumer / Installer Guide (Guide)

A ‘user-friendly’ guide promoting storage best practice and safety

Research objectives (RO)


Project team have reviewed:

• Journal and conference papers

• National and internal reports e.g. PNNL, DoE, etc.

• National and international standards/codes e.g. AS/NZ

• Online literature and magazines

• Build on CSIROs know-how and knowledge e.g. Hampton Park, SEIF, Li-ion installation, AEMO and AEMC reports, etc.

Literature review


• Consulted with 12 Australian storage stakeholders – included installers, grid-designers, manufactures, storage suppliers, etc.

Consulted with ES stakeholders


• A wide range of technology options exist: 1. Lead acid batteries

2. Lithium ion batteries

3. Nickel-cadmium batteries

4. Nickel metal hydride batteries

5. Flow batteries

• All have different technology/manufacturing maturity levels

• Each technology has advantages and disadvantages

• Each battery chemistry type has its own unique (safety) challenges

General findings


• Limited number of installers have adequate training and accreditation to install storage – in particular lithium-ion systems

• Very limited standards for battery installations – includes signage, location, ventilation, safety protocols, fire protection, etc.

Preliminary safety findings


Sources:

http://www.samsungsdi.com/ess/residential-commercial-solution

http://www.sma.de/en/products/solarinverters/sunny-boy-3600-5000-smart-energy.html

SMA PV inverter

+ 2kWh Li-ion storage

Samsung PV

inverter + 3.6kWh or 5.6kWh

Li-ion storage

For example (case study for AS standards):

• A number of standards exist e.g. lead-acid batteries (AS 4029), nickel-cadmium batteries (AS 3731) and stand-alone power systems (AS 4086 & AS/NZS 4509).

• Some standards are out-of-date (e.g. 22 years old) and only consider specific cases (e.g. off-grid and stand-alone).

• Standards relating to grid-connected inverters and storage (AS 4777 & AS/NZS 5603) are currently being developed and/or under review.

Preliminary safety findings (cont.)


• Limited education for emergency services (fire brigade, police and ambulance) i.e. fire, electrical shock, chemical exposure, etc.

How do you extinguish residential lithium–ion battery fire e.g. water mist, sand, toxic fire suppressant, etc.?



• Lack of reporting of stationary storage installations and incidences – safety protocol needs to be put in place

• Lack of battery (excludes Lead-acid) disposal standards and recycling e.g. whole-of-life



Conclusions:

• A number of preliminary findings identified e.g. lack of standards, best practices, education, etc.

• Work is continuing

What’s next?

• Prepare report and guide

• Publish report and guide – late October 2015

• Present findings to stakeholders

Conclusions and What’s next?


Thank you Dr Sam Behrens Demand Side Energy Technologies Research Group Leader t +61 2 49606133 [email protected] w www.csiro.au/energy

ENERGY TECHNOLOGY

Acknowledgments

Miss Kate Cavanagh

Important Disclaimer:

CSIRO advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.

© Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation 2015

To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO.

Disclaimer


Recycling energy storage batteries

Clean Energy Council, 16 July 2015

Helen Lewis Australian Battery Recycling Initiative

ABRI’s vision

Effective stewardship of all end-of-life batteries

Product stewardship

Safety (zero harm)

Responsible environmental management

Recovery at end of life

(zero waste)

Members

http://recyclingnearyou.com.au/h/planetark.org/

Advocacy, education, engagement

• Handheld batteries

• Automotive and industrial batteries

What we do

Lead acid batteries

Find a recycler

Guidelines

Regulations

Other energy storage batteries

Guide to recycling

options for energy

storage batteries (early

draft):

www.batteryrecycling.o

rg.au/recycling/energy-

storage-batteries

http://www.batteryrecycling.org.au/recycling/energy-storage-batteries






Recyclability issues

• Emerging technologies with uncertain recyclability

• ‘Recyclability’ is a function of:

− The value of material components

− Recycling facilities with the ability to recover value from used batteries

− Available collection infrastructure

− Someone willing to pay for recycling (if required), i.e.:

o The waste generator (fee for service) OR

o The producer (product stewardship fee)

It’s a question of economics

Costs Value

It’s a question of economics

Costs Value

Cadmium, nickel

Zinc, manganese

Steel, cobalt

Fee

Collection

Sorting

Reprocessing

Education

Safety issues for lithium batteries

Storage – potential for short circuit or over-heating

Recycling - batteries hidden in pallets of used lead acid batteries (Li-ion

batteries often look like lead acid batteries)

Disposal – landfill fires

Gaps for lithium batteries

Safety issues for lithium batteries need to be addressed through

collaboration between manufacturers, distributors, end users, emergency

services, regulators…

• Gaps in ADG (e.g. large / damaged batteries) … next version 7.4 will address

• Standards / guidelines for storage, transport, packaging…

• Guidelines for emergency response

• Guidelines for distributors, installers, consumers, recyclers…

Global initiatives

RECHARGE - http://www.rechargebatteries.org/knowledge-base/safety/

CTIF (International Association of Fire and Rescue Services) – what firefighters need to know

when approaching a lithium fire http://www.ctif.org/extrication-new-technology/about

http://www.rechargebatteries.org/knowledge-base/safety/



http://www.ctif.org/extrication-new-technology/about





for more information

Contact details

Helen Lewis

Ph.: 0419 010 158

Email: [email protected]

www.batteryrecycling.org.au

Twitter @battstewarship

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.batteryrecycling.org.au/

DNV GL ©2015 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER DNV GL ©2015

Developing Standards

1

Understanding DNV GL's GRIDSTOR Approach to Creating

Recommended Practices for Safe and Reliable Storage Installations

Niraj Garimella

16 July 2015

DNV GL ©2015

About DNV GL

16,000 EMPLOYEES

400 OFFICES

100 COUNTRIES

Energy Oil & Gas Software Business

Assurance Maritime

151 Year History

2

DNV GL ©2015

Agenda

State of Play

– Grid-Connected Energy Storage Systems

– Standards

Results of DNV GL Energy Storage Standard Analysis

GRIDSTOR

– Description

– Goals

– Value Add

– Expected Results

Summary

3

DNV GL ©2015

State of Play – Grid-Connected Energy Storage Systems

Present situation

– Increasing demand for Grid-Connected Energy Storage Systems

– Increasing attention to safety, operation and performance

Lack of globally recognised safety, performance and operation standards for Grid-

Connected Energy Storage Systems, which is resulting in:

– Difficulty proving the validity of a system

– Risk of damaging the global energy storage market

4

DNV GL ©2015

State of Play – Standards Activities

Standards are considered one of the larger gap areas in storage deployment

This gap is focused on:

– Safety

– Reliability

– Commissioning and installation

There are a number of efforts that are currently being undertaken internationally to address the issues of Safety, Codes and Standards:

– Sandia National Labs – Standards Inventory and Roadmap

– PNNL has a program focused on key installations

– EPRI has an ESIC “Energy Storage Integration Council” and has set up a focus group on Standards

– IEC Technical Committee 120

– DNV GL – GRIDSTOR, Recommended Practices

5

http://communicatebetterblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/standards.jpg

DNV GL ©2015

Why there is a need to address Standards – Results of DNV GL Energy Storage Standard Analysis

~100 standards applicable to energy storage found

Majority of safety testing standards are at cell or module level, not system level

Majority of safety requirements standards are at system level

There are few standards on system lifetime

The majority of performance specifications is focused on systems

There are few standards that simultaneously correlate safety risk to failure

modes, and none at a system level

The majority of safety categories fall in the mobile segment

Our “Inventory” was shared with NAATBatt and coordinated with Sandia and PNNL

6

DNV GL ©2015

So many standards exist, why do we need Recommended Practices?

“There are already so many standards, and together they cover all relevant aspects of grid-connected energy

storage.”

Not Exactly…

Safety is still the largest concern, rightfully so…help is being requested

No single standard that comprehensively covers and links all aspects relevant for grid-connected energy

storage (fragmentation)

Unclear or impossible to combine ~100 standards into 1 comprehensive standard

– Wildly differing scopes

– Difficult to read/understand

– Difficult to get overview, know and choose from all standards

A standard may address an aspect (“X”), but may not cover it completely

A standard may address an aspect (“X”), but may have a low quality for it

Gaps exist: some aspects are not or insufficiently covered

7

DNV GL ©2015

Joint Industry Project: Recommended Practices (RP) for Grid-Connected Energy Storage Systems – GRIDSTOR

DNV GL set up & coordinating an open source Joint Industry Project (JIP) to

facilitate / stimulate optimal and safe implementation of Energy Storage

JIP Consortium: DNSPs, TNSPs, ES system integrators, suppliers, regulators

Deliverable: Recommended Practices on Grid-Connected Energy Storage

– guidelines and methods to evaluate, assess and test safety, operation and

performance of grid-connected energy storage

– taking into account worldwide accepted regulations and best practices like ISO,

IEC and IEEE standards

The RP has important benefits over existing standards. Crucial distinctions are

that the RP will:

– cover a broad range of ES systems, instead of one or more battery types

– have a system-level approach, instead of being limited to one or two key

components

– have a more comprehensive and structured approach, e.g. creating an

FMECA / HAZOP instead of generally dealing with safety issues

8

SAFETY

FMECA/

HAZOP

Design

consequences

Grid

implementation

(technical)

Legal

aspects

OPERATION

Lifetime

determination

State of Health

determination

Control

systems

State of Charge

determination

PERFORMANCE

Requirements Specifications

Validation Data acquisition

DNV GL ©2015

What are DNV GL Goals with GRIDSTOR?

We are not looking to create new standards…our belief is that there is enough “basis” already

that current material can be leveraged and modified to incorporate new technologies being

introduced

We are focusing on key aspects such as safety and reliability – introducing our methodologies

utilised in writing recommended practices from storage / batteries being introduced in

industries

– Noted that the Utility industry isn’t the first to adopt storage, it is one of the last…

– …however, what we are doing with the technology, multiple uses, bundled applications, and

very large scale is unique

Our focus is global as we are looking to advance the concepts in North America, Europe,

APAC, Middle East, and South America

Coordinate with agencies already active to create a guidebook (RP) and approach for new

adopters of storage to utilise

9

DNV GL ©2015

What Value does the GRIDSTOR Recommended Practice add?

A guidebook that allows new adopters to easily understand the steps that need to be taken in

order to install storage systems

One framework for grid-connected energy storage

Gaps filled: addition/expansion with newly written guidelines where needed

Comprehensive and complete

– System-level approach, but including components

– Addressing issues from an international perspective

– Created specifically for grid-connected energy storage

– Created by international industry-wide consortium

Recommended Practice: freely accessible, well maintained, updated and delivered to the

market quickly

10

DNV GL ©2015

Results of GRIDSTOR Recommended Practices

Main results of GRIDSTOR Recommended Practices:

– Recommended configuration method

– Recommended risk evaluation method

– Recommended life cycle assessment method (economics, environment)

– Recommended performance test suite

– Recommended safety test suite

Defining building blocks for an open competitive market place

Overall layer over local standards and regulations

Continuous updates following technology development & end-user applications

– Need for further participation from the industry

11

DNV GL ©2015

What Have We Done Previously?

Maritime Battery Safety and recommended practices

Testing

– Stationary Storage testing up to 2 MW

– Destructive testing

– Cycle testing

– Functionality testing

Technical Advisory

12

DNV GL ©2015

Summary

Several standards exist covering various aspects of grid-connected energy

storage system

No single standard that comprehensively covers and links all aspects relevant for

grid-connected energy storage

DNV GL has set up and is coordinating an open source Joint Industry Project –

GRIDSTOR to facilitate optimal and safe implementation of energy storage

The Recommended Practice guidebook will allow new adopters to easily

understand the steps that need to be taken in order to install storage systems

The Recommended Practice guidebook is expected to be published by the end of

2015

New Participants are welcome to join GRIDSTOR

13

DNV GL ©2015

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

www.dnvgl.com

Thank you

14

Niraj Garimella

[email protected]

https://www.dnvgl.com/news/gridstor-recommended-practice-on-grid-connected-energy-storage-first-draft-28677

Presentation Agenda

• The parties involved in connection• The connection process• Common concerns during connection• State based process differences• Top tips

Who gets involved?

• You – the Proponent• Equipment suppliers• Distribution Network Service Provider (DNSP)• Me – the Consultant

The Process

The Process

PreliminaryConnectionDiscussion

ConnectionEnquiry

ConnectionApplication

Negotiationand Connection

Agreement

Common Commercial Concerns

• Unknown total cost of connection – includingequipment requirements

• Tariffs – the future is unknown• Inability to gain network support payments• ‘Monopolistic’ behaviour of DNSP – driven by

regulated requirements

Common Process Concerns

• Time taken to complete the process• Unknown/non-understood requirements at

the start of the process• Ongoing compliance of generators once

installation and testing complete

Common Technical Concerns

• Understanding of equipment capabilities• Secondary Protection Requirements• Voltage Fluctuation Issues• Fault Level Headroom Issues• Export of Energy to the Distribution Network• Inter-tripping with DNSP network

State based differences

• Stepped requirements – at what generatorsize do the requirements change

• Secondary protection requirements• Utilisation of NER Chapter 5A requirements

Our Top Tipsü Begin a conversation with the DNSP early – the process takes time and is

DNSP specificü Ensure you have adequate technical support – show the DNSP that you are

serious and understand the issuesü Every location is different – seek to understand the specific issues with

your siteü Prepare a concise application and seek total costs from the DNSP including

augmentation costsü Expect technical complexity – present the abilities of the equipment you

are planning to useü Remember that DNSP’s have regulated responsibilities and cannot

compromise on certain requirementsü Provide information to the DNSP’s in a concise and accessible format

Grid Connection Practicalities [Commercial Scale IES (30-500kW)]

Matt Haddad – Director

TOPICS

Distribution Network Service Provider (DNSP) Issues

General Grid Connection Process What to Expect

Application Process

Indicative Costs

Commissioning

Energisation

DNSP Technical Issues – Power

Quality Power Quality Issues

o Voltage rise depending on location within network (Steady State Voltage Issues)

o Momentary voltage deviations (Flicker)

o Harmonics (Distortion of the AC Waveform)

Impacts of Poor Power Quality o Equipment and appliances fail prematurely (PC

power supplies and electronics with capacitors are especially vulnerable)

o Lights flicker - annoyance

o Motor windings overheat and fail

o RCDs do not operate correctly

For more information: http://www.iea-pvps-task10.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=4

http://www.iea-pvps-task10.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=4





DNSP Technical Issues – Fault

Levels Fault Level Issues

o Under fault conditions large amounts of energy flow through the network.

o This flow of energy needs to be stopped by circuit breakers to prevent catastrophic failure.

o All switchgear has a rating of maximum faults they can stop.

o Additional IES can increase fault levels.

Impacts of Increased Fault Levels o If switchgear ratings are exceeded = catastrophic failure.

DNSP Technical Issues – Islanding

What is Islanding??

o Islanding is when part of the grid gets disconnected from the main source but continues to operate.

o Generally islanding is extremely unlikely!

o Studies indicate probability = 8.3x10-10

o Design probability of severe nuclear core damage = 1.0x10-6

Islanding Issues & Impacts

o Danger to linesman.

o Danger to public – live earth faults.

o Significant damage to DNSP & customer equipment during ACR operation.

For more information: http://www.iea-pvps-task10.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=4






Grid Connection Process

1. Initial Enquiry (By Proponent)

2. Technical Review and Clarification (By DNSP)

3. Formalisation and Connection Agreement (Proponent & DNSP)

4. Installation (By Proponent)

5. Commissioning of Protection Equipment (By Proponent / Review by DNSP)

6. Energisation

Grid Connection Process (Indicative Costs*)

*Costs are based on Clean Technology Partners experience at time of presentation and is subject to constant revision. Clean Technology Partners accepts no responsibility or liability for the unauthorised use of this information.

Grid Connection Process (Cont’d)

1. Initial Enquiry • Know what you want and know your site!

– System Size and Technology (inverters, PV modules, protection equipment, etc)

– Connection Point

– Existing Electrical Infrastructure

– Know your DNSP!!

• Application Paperwork

• Engineering Sign-off (eg NPER, RPEQ, CEng)


2. Technical Review What to Expect:

– Technical questions around Power Quality, Fault Levels and Islanding.

– Questions around system operation: • Inverter and Network Protection

• Alarms

• Fail-safe mechanisms

• Advanced controls (zero export controllers, PLCs, etc)

– Questions around existing conditions (electrical infrastructure configuration)

Keep Calm & Carry On!!


3. Formalisation and Connection Agreement You will receive a legal contract.

System owner needs to be aware of

T’s & C’s!

• Liabilities

• Roles and Responsibilities

Consult legal experts if unsure.


4. Installation The easy bit!


5. Commissioning • Inverter Commissioning

– Date/time, language

– Communications

– AS4777 inverter settings

– Demand records!

• Protection System Commissioning – Signal injection testing of protection relays

– Pick-up and timing tests

– Functional tests

– Demand records!

DNSP final review of commissioning records to ensure that system is installed correctly.


5. Energisation

The End – Thank-you

www.clean-tech.com.au

Matt Haddad – Technical Director (03) 9005 7371

[email protected]

For further information: https://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/dam/cec/policy-and-

advocacy/ARENA/FPDI/Priorities-for-inverter-system-standards.pdf

http://www.clean-tech.com.au/






https://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/dam/cec/policy-and-advocacy/ARENA/FPDI/Priorities-for-inverter-system-standards.pdf














Size template

Grid Connection Masterclass – Energex

John Lansley – Senior Network Solutions

Engineer

The average

system size has

doubled since

2010

• Reverse power on up to 12 off 11 kV feeders – major impact on

Regulators

• Around 100 voltage enquiries per month – 40% solar related and remedial work required on 20 distribution substations (typically by balancing the LV network and dropping transformer tap)

• Remedial costs – around $11 Mill per annum

•High voltage at customer supply points - can cause damage to customer

equipment and lead to insurance claims (a $30 K claim where a non solar

customer received up to 264 volts)

•42 kW of Solar PV’s on 100 kVA transformer

•1200 m of LV cable (240 mm2)

•2 x 10 kW, 2 x 4.5 kW and 1 x 5.3 kW Solar PV systems

•Unbalance volts with one phase up to 264 Volts (at CP)

• High voltage can cause nuisance ‘overvoltage’ protection tripping of

customer Solar PV inverters leading to customer complaints due to loss of revenue.

Key Network Issues

Energex Connection Standards

• 1143 – Connection guidelines for PV/IES Systems up to 30kVA

• 233 – Connection guidelines for PV/IES systems 30kW – 5MW

(equivalent to Chapter 5A of NER)

• 1188 – Connection guidelines for embedded generation >5MW

(equivalent to Chapter 5 of NER)

• Location – www.energex.com.au

http://www.energex.com.au/

Assessment Criteria

• Test 1 – 11kV Feeder penetration test (15% of 50POE rating)

• Test 2 – Distribution transformer penetration test (25%)

• Test 3 – Unbalanced generation test (Si < 8% nameplate rating

transformer)

• Test 4 – HV Disturbance Test (Si / Ssc < 0.1%) at 11kV PCC

• Test 5 – LV Disturbance Test (Si / Ssc < 1.0%) at LV PCC

Si = inverter rating (kVA)

Ssc= short circuit rating (kVA)

Alternatives Where Test Fails

• Test 1 & 2 – nil export system, reduce size.

• Test 3 – three phase system, reduce size

• Test 4 & 5 – look at customer side mitigation for reducing voltage

disturbance (eg. Varying power factor, lower emission inverters)

• Network side mitigations funded by customer are also options (eg

dedicated transformer, HV feeder)

Network Solutions to address increasing levels of

solar PV penetration Balancing the PV load is an effective action when there are large single phase solar PV

systems on the smaller distribution transformers (less than 20 customers). Balancing is less

effective on the larger distribution transformers (where there are up to 100 customers) and the

loads are better balanced

A change in transformer tap will reduce the voltage by 6 Volts (2.5%) – this is the main action

for addressing high voltage but may not be possible if the customer voltages fall below the

regulated limit of 225.4 V . Generally only one tap-change increment can be accommodated

without compromising overall voltage regulation.

An upgraded transformer will allow the opportunity to re-set the taps (by 6 volts) and allow

higher penetrations of solar PV. This action may not be possible if the pole is not suitable for

the additional loads.

A new transformer is generally required where the high voltage is caused by long lengths of

LV, typically in excess of 600 metres – this may be all Energex LV conductors or part Energex

and part consumer mains. The cost for a new transformer installation can be considerable if

the 11 kV network has to be extended a long distance.

Where there are smaller aged conductors (e.g 7/.080 copper) re-conductoring is an option to

reduce voltage rise/drop and maintain LV within regulated limits. Modelling indicates that re-

conductoring 7/.080 with LVABC can halve the voltage rise.

Some of the newer technologies (e.g on load tap changer) are expected to cost more than an

upgraded transformer, but less than the installation of a new transformer, but others (e.g

STATCOM) is expected to be at a similar cost to a new transformer. The STATCOM does

have other advantages as it can offset peak load with the use of the battery storage.

Calculations Required Where Test 4 & 5 Fail

• Internal voltage rise

• Harmonics - ∛( 𝐻𝑖3)

• Flicker – calculate actual voltage rise at PCC based on source

impedance.

• Ramping of inverters to match load for nil export. I

Vr

IX

IR

Vs

Other Items

• Approved relay list for backup anti-islanding

• Nil export requirements

• Inverter settings – 257V overvoltage (260V 2 sec)

• Leave inverters OFF prior to metering being installed

Parameter Setting

Vmax

Vmin

Fmax

Fmin

Disconnect time

Reconnect time

257V (260V 2 sec)

210V

52Hz

47Hz

2 secs

60 - 90 seconds

Design Certification

Report (DCR)

Test & Commissioning

Report (TCR)

• Network connection diagram

• Protection line diagram

• Protection settings

• Inverter & panel details, incl settings

• Calculation of internal voltage rise to PCC

• If fails Test 4 & 5 – calculations showing

customer mitigation for power quality

• Signed by a Registered Professional

Engineer Qld (RPEQ)

• Steady state voltage log

• Flicker and harmonics log before & after.

• Anti-islanding tests

• OV/UV setting on backup relay – pickup

test.

• Signed by a Registered Professional

Engineer Qld (RPEQ)

ENERGEX ASSESSMENT

Test Limit Actual Pass/Fail

1. 11kV Feeder Penetration Test 323 kV.A 346 kV.A fail

2. Distribution Transformer Penetration

Test 25.0% 49.8%

fail

4. 11kV Feeder Voltage Fluctuation & Distortion Test 0.10% 0.24% fail

5. LV Feeder Voltage Fluctuation & Distortion Test 1.0% 0.1% pass

ASSESSMENT RESULT FAIL

Example 2

Customer applies for 96kVA 3 phase off a shared transformer 315kVA nameplate rating. Source

impedance 0.2447+j1.81 ohms on 11kV, Ztr = 3.265+j15.01 ohms as seen at 11kV terminals.

11kV Feeder CRB15A – Min feeder load estimated at 30% feeder load = 646kVA (Max PV

penetration = 50% min feeder load). There is already 61kW connected PV to distribution

transformer, and 250kVA off 11kV feeder.

Options

Nil export (overcomes Test 1)

Dedicated transformer (overcomes Test 2 & 5)

Reduce size to pass Test 4 or prove by calculation & customer side mitigation that no quality of

supply concerns on HV.

Summary

Size Assessment Nil Export Backup

Protection

RPEQ

Design

RPEQ

Testing

Assessment

Fee

≤ 5kW No N/A No No No No

>5 to 30 kW Yes Option No No No No

>30 to

150kW

Yes Option Approved

relay, no

NVD for nil

export

Yes If fails Test

4 or 5

$1300 -

$3000

>150kW Yes Option Approved

relay,

includes

NVD on HV

Yes Yes Actual costs

Ryan Wavish, Marchment Hill Consulting

Future Proofing the Distribution Industry

Review of Policies and Incentives

The Australian Clean Energy Summit, July 2015

2

This review was part of the CEC’s FPDI project

Future Proofing in Australia’s

Electricity Distribution System

Facilitate the effective and efficient integration of renewable energy systems for Australia’s electricity

distribution industry, and subsequently maximise the benefits of the transformation of this key industry

toward a renewable energy future

Analysis of opportunities for demand side management

activities in commercial premises

Review of regulatory and policy work undertaken to date

Review and critical evaluation of policies and incentives

locally and review of international settings

Valuation methodology for small scale embedded generation

and storage contribution to networks

Assessment of industry requirements for a commercial scale

inverter performance study

Grid connection experience survey of generators #1

Priority Activities (Year 1 of 3)

3

The review focused on small scale EG, storage and DSM

Objectives

1. Critically evaluate the current market conditions in Australia with respect to

the challenges for the increased uptake of

- Embedded Generation (EG) (<5MW)

- Storage (<5MWh)

- Demand Side Management (DSM)

2. Reveal lessons from international markets

3. Develop short term priorities and long term goals for policy settings and

incentive arrangements

Approach

- Stakeholder interviews (43 individuals across 33 organisations)

- Literature review

- International case studies (VaasaETT)

- FPDI steering committee review, feedback and discussion/debate

Limitations

• Broad and shallow

• Recommendations “for further consideration” only

• Stakeholder views and perspectives often very different and conflicting

4

The review was guided by interviews with a wide variety of

stakeholders and feedback from the FPDI steering committee

5

Key findings focused on four areas

Commercial constraints under which distribution network service providers are required to operate

Effectiveness of technical standards and processes

for integrating distributed energy technologies

The ability of the regulatory framework to support an efficient and

effective transition

The costs of emerging technologies

Limiting market

conditions

6

1. Commercial constraints under which distribution

network service providers are required to operate

Network Tariffs

While reforms toward cost reflective tariffs

are encouraging…

There is opportunity to further reflect the

network value of embedded generation

the value of embedded generation output

the value of distributed energy resources in

rural and remote areas

Utilise a framework to value EG output,

trial VNM of distributed energy credit

arrangements

Consider opportunities to restructure CSO

subsidy to DER where appropriate

Review role of DNSPs and options for

contestable markets for fringe of grid

communities (incl. ring-fencing

arrangements)

Network Revenue Drivers

• Currently RAB focussed

• Need to ensure no commercial dis-incentive

for non-network solutions (e.g. via the DMIS,

RIT-D)

Develop best practice network planning

approach

Benchmark DM investment across networks

Falling/Reduced Demand

Potential implications for RAB at risk Policies and incentives to support EV uptake

Issues Recommendations for further consideration

7

2. Effectiveness of technical standards and processes for

integrating distributed energy technologies

Connection process for embedded generation

Consistency of regulations governing the

connection process of embedded

generators between 30kW and 5MW

capacity

Consistency of connection processes for

embedded generators less than 30kW

• Extend the application of Chapter 5 of the

NER (or equivalent) to all jurisdictions

• Consider the development of a national

online portal for all small scale solar PV

installations

• Publish details of localised network

constraints across Australia to inform all

stakeholders of issues on the grid

Connection standards for embedded

generation

The lack of connection standards for embedded

generators between 30kW and 5MW

• Progress the continued development of

enhanced inverter standards for all

embedded generation rated up to 5MW

Technical standards for emerging technologies

• The need for technical standards for storage

• The need for technical standards for demand

management devices

• Progress the further development and

finalisation of Australian Standards for

demand management devices


8

3. The ability of the regulatory framework to support an

efficient and effective transition

National Electricity Objective

The relevance of the current National

Electricity Objective (NEO) to support changing

customer needs

• Undertake a review to investigate the

evolution of the NEO or other related

instruments to reflect community

expectations for sustainability

The reform process

The ability of the reform process to adequately

deal with the required changes in time

• Review the processes, timeframes and

governance of regulatory reform to identify

and assess opportunities to improve the

efficiency

Regulation of emerging business models

The regulatory approach to emerging business

models which support the uptake of new

technologies

• Promote the sustainable and credible

development of the alternative energy seller

(AES) status


9

4. The costs of emerging technologies

Direct Funding Support

• Financing emerging business models

• Funding pre-commercial technology

developments

• Funding knowledge sharing resources

• Supporting community energy projects

• Maintain funding for key Federal agencies,

specifically ARENA and the CEFC

• Explore opportunities for extending and

enhancing existing funding streams and

mechanisms to support community energy

projects in Australia

Cost of Storage

The prohibitive costs of storage technology

• Encourage the Commonwealth Government

to replace the fuel-tax credit scheme as it

relates to diesel used for energy generation

with direct subsidies for eligible remote

communities which could be applied to any

energy solution


10

About MHC

Our Philosophy

The MHC philosophy, validated and reinforced by

our work for clients around the world, holds that

the value (V) of a consulting intervention rests on

three cornerstones:

MHC is a management consulting firm determined to make a difference by serving the needs of the

energy and water sectors in Australia.

Our quarterly journal, QSI Online, shares our insights with the industries we serve and empowers

businesses with high quality, content-rich and contemporary information relevant to their industry.

Read it at www.marchmenthill.com/qsi-online

Marchment Hill Consulting

Level 4, 530 Lonsdale Street

Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia

Phone: +61 3 9602 5604

Fax: +61 3 9642 5626








MID-SCALE EMBEDDED GENERATION Potential for network support

Chris Blanksby 16/07/2015

OVERVIEW

CEC FPDI TA-2D project on “Revealing the Potential for Mid-Scale Embedded Generation and Storage to add Value to Networks”

Opportunities offered by:

Information availability

Revenue streams for network support

Addressing historical reasons for low penetration of renewable based embedded generators

TYPICAL MID SCALE EMBEDDED GENERATION Mid Scale Embedded Generation broadly 30 kW – 5 MW

Connected to the distribution network

Lower end: e.g. 200 kW rooftop PV connected with a customer load

Higher end: e.g. 2 x 2MW wind turbines

e.g. temporary thermal generator

INFORMATION

Proponents and DNSPs must exchange information

Historically, this is iterative, time consuming, and without strong understanding of each other’s drivers

For lower end connections, proponents may:

be committed to a customer

have invested significantly to get to prefeasibility and connection enquiry

have limited margin (time or budget)

This creates considerable pressure to push through the connection

INFORMATION

Upfront network information enables initial screening

Benefits proponent and DNSP

Many exciting tools under development and becoming available

Mid-scale EG or storage system

Unbundled revenue

Market based revenue streams

Behind the meter?

Market participant?

Retail tariff or power purchase

agreement

Yes

No

Utilise aggregator?

Network support

Network support agreement-Deferred network investment -NSCAS-Other network services

No No

YesYes

Avoided TUOS

Energy sales

Energy arbitrage Innovation

incentive schemes

REVENUE STREAMS

Energy sales

Energy arbitrage (using storage)

Avoided TUOS

Network support

Deferred network upgrades

Network support and control ancillary services (NSCAS)

(renewable energy certificates)

REVENUE STREAMS

Revenue stream Renewable generator

Renewable generator + storage

Schedulable generator

Energy sales

Energy arbitrage

Avoided TUOS

Deferred distribution network upgrades

NSCAS

Timing of available information and time to prepare proposals

Performance specification

Limited duration of the contract (deferral)

Lack of cost information on network solutions (and transparency on costing)

The basis of revenue streams is not necessarily clear

Lack of clarity on performance risks (STIPIS)

Commercial contract negotiation costs

LIMITED UPTAKE TO DATE

THE WAY FORWARD

Cost reflective pricing

Improving information flow

Simplified mechanisms to determine network support on a risk basis

Low cost battery storage for renewable embedded generators

Improved, real-time network communications capability integrating embedded generators and storage with demand

CONTACTS

Chris Blanksby – Senior Renewable Energy Engineer E: [email protected] P: 0408 526 625

Distributed energy: valuing the financial impacts on distribution networks Adapting the Distribution Grid

16th July 2015

Dr Nick Cutler

Defining DERs

► Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) are:

► Any small electricity generator that may be installed at multiple locations within a

distribution network

► Examples include rooftop solar PV, micro-turbines, battery storage, Electric Vehicles (EVs)

Source: www.teslamotors.com

► The financial structure of the electricity system was established

without consideration of consumers generating their own electricity

► DERs bring both costs and benefits to the electricity system, which raises the

questions:

► What are the costs and benefits?

► Who is responsible for them?

► How do we put them together in a consistent manner?

► How to quantify each cost and benefit?

► How to distribute these costs and benefits amongst stakeholders?

► Benefits of answering these questions

► Encourage efficient and appropriate future development

► Help DNSPs to evaluate DER-based solutions to network constraints

We answered these questions

for distribution network

service providers (DNSPs)

What is this all about?

With and without DERs

Attributing costs and benefits of DERs

Distribution

network

DERs

Transmission

network

Generators

DNSPs

Consumers

TNSPs

System Operator

Retailers

Network augmentation

Network support

Voltage regulation

Power quality

Protection and control schemes

Network reliability

Islanding

Network augmentation

Distribution losses

Transmission losses

Wholesale market/fuel replacement

System reliability

Social/environmental

Costs/benefits

passed through

retailers to

consumers

Reduced

output/

revenue

Key aspects of framework

► Valuation boundaries must be defined that are:

► large enough to realise the full extent of the impact the DERs

have on a distribution network

► small enough to preserve local detail

► A medium-voltage feeder level (e.g., 11 kV) is

proposed as the most appropriate boundary to use

► Alternative boundaries may still be suitable

Feeder classification

► Classification of feeders is desirable to:

► Reduce computational burden

► Communicate to the market in a timely fashion

► Minimise duplication of effort across jurisdictions

► Requirements for feeder classification:

► DER type

► Network type: The interconnectivity of the network.







► DER type


► Customer type: customers in the network use electricity in different ways







► DER type


► Customer type: customers in the network use electricity in different ways

► Geographical location: The local demand and behaviour of DERs can vary significantly by

location

► Network loading: highly loaded networks may be able to have upgrades deferred due to

the installation of DERs

► DER locations (within a network)

The proposed framework – example outcomes

Net cost

Net benefit

Take home messages

This study produced a framework for Australian DNSPs to quantify the net cost or benefit of DERs to their expenditure on the distribution network

The list of costs and benefits is applicable to all Australian DNSPs.

Computational burden is biggest barrier. A feeder-classification has been suggested to reduce this, but more investigation is required.

The full report is published at: http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/policy-advocacy/arena/FPDI-project/value-of-small-scale-generation.html

http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/policy-advocacy/arena/FPDI-project/value-of-small-scale-generation.html























Thank you

Any questions?

Dr Nick Cutler Senior Manager | Power & Utilities | Transaction Advisory Services

Ernst & Young

[email protected]

What we did

► Developed a nationally applicable framework to assist DNSPs to evaluate the

relevant costs and benefits of DERs for their network business

► A comprehensive literature review and international benchmarking

► Assessing other methods and frameworks in use or proposed

► Obtained a case study from industry for demonstrative purposes

► Assessed technical, economic and regulatory barriers to taking up the

framework

► Made recommendations for next steps

► All done with industry consultation

Included Costs and Benefits

Category Financial impact on

network, if applicable Cost/ Benefit/

Either Description

Network

augmentation High Either

Changes in expenditure on any network augmentation associated with the DERs,

including replacements or upgrades of cables or transformers. This also includes

entirely new developments, for example, where a brand new feeder or similar is to be

developed.

Network support High Either Benefits or costs associated with DER(s) offsetting generation from contracted

distribution network support facilities or avoiding the need to obtain such contracts.

Voltage regulation Moderate Either Costs from adjusting taps on transformers, or installing/upgrading transformers to

maintain acceptable voltage levels for customers.

Power quality issues Moderate Either Any associated value from grid support that the DER might provide/require. These are

managing harmonics, DC injection and flicker.

Reassessment of

protection and

control schemes Low Cost

Fault current settings may need to be changed and retested, depending on the

designed operation of the DERs during a fault.

Network reliability Currently low, but

potentially significant Either

As part of operating and maintaining a distribution network, DNSPs have reliability

standards to meet, with associated penalties if they don’t. These penalties are

intended to be related to the Value of Customer Reliability (VCR). This category refers

specifically to these penalties.

Islanding capability Currently not

applicable, but

potentially significant Benefit

Any benefit to customer reliability through being able to use the DERs to create a

stable island network during a fault. This value would be set to zero if the DERs are

configured to automatically disconnect during a fault. EY notes that islanding is not

currently desirable in networks due their present design characteristics.

Excluded Costs and Benefits

Category Description Reason for exclusion

DUOS Distribution Use of System (DUOS) charges are levied

by the DNSP for use of their distribution network.

DERs affect DUOS charges applicable in the area where they are located through

influencing losses in the network. DUOS charges are passed through to customers,

and are not borne by the DNSP.

TUOS Transmission Use of System charges (TUOS)are applied

by TNSPs for use of their transmission network.

TUOS charges are a cost passed through directly to consumers thus not borne by

the DNSP. Avoided TUOS is an important contribution attributable to DERs, but

should be captured as a benefit to the transmission networks.

Fuel replacement Cost savings from DER generation offsetting generation

from more expensive fuels. Fuel costs (or savings) are not borne by DNSPs but by retailers.

Wholesale market value Value obtained via control of DERs to allow arbitrage in

the wholesale electricity market, or influencing market

prices through merit order effects.

Any wholesale market value from operating DERs is external to the distribution

network.

Network control ancillary

services

Value from DERs providing Network Control Ancillary

Services (NCAS) to provide voltage and transient

support to the network.

NCAS applies to support of the transmission grid, not the distribution grid. Therefore

DERs providing NCAS would benefit the transmission network, not the distribution

network. Equivalent services in the distribution network are included in the ‘Network

support’ category.

Network losses Cost of changes to electrical losses in the distribution

network (and in the transmission network).

Distribution losses are affected by DERs but are borne by the retailer (and

recovered from customers). Impacts of altered distribution losses are reflected in

other value categories.

Safety issues Costs associated with delivering network services at

expected safety levels Costs associated with maintaining safety standards may by impacted by DERs but

should be reflected in calculations of included categories.

Adapting the distribution grid

Clean Energy Week 2015 Lara Olsen

CitiPower Powercor

Agenda

• CitiPower Powercor – who are we

• Considerations for a distribution company

• Actions we’re taking

CitiPower and Powercor networks service 1.1 million customers

Summary Statistics Powercor Citipower

Connection points 765,241 325,917

Regulated asset value (A$B) 3.16 1.70

Electricity distributed (GWh) 10,556 5,981

Distribution network (km2) 145,651 157

Network line length(km) 67,006 3,186

Customer density (per km2) 5.3 2,076

Customer density (per km line) 11.4 102.3

• Powercor’s geographic region is shaded in red

• CitiPower’s geographic region is shaded in blue

3

We operate the most efficient rural and urban networks

We see the grid as a key enabler of customer choice and evolving technology

Agenda




Some context from a distribution perspective - I

Residential vs C&I Load Total consumption (kWh), 2014

80% 68%

20% 32%

CitiPower Powercor

Residential

Commercial & Industrial

Some context from a distribution perspective - II

Assessment of options

RIT-D specifies that preferred option must:

• Maximise the present value of net economic benefit1

• Be commercially feasible

• Be technically feasible (including meeting reliability criteria)

1. To those produce, consume and transport electricity in the NEM 2. Source: Powercor Distribution Annual Planning Report, available at http://www.powercor.com.au

$42m $42m $39m

Network Option 1 Network Option 2 Non-network option

Example: Augmentation options at Merbein ZSS – net economic benefits2

Some context from a distribution perspective - III

Agenda




Actions we are taking

Net Metering

We welcome your input and look forward to working with you on this

Thank you

[email protected]

DNV GL © 16th July 2015 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER DNV GL © 16th July 2015

Beyond Integration – The Dynamics Reshaping Renewables and the Grid

1

Dr. Sanjay C. Kuttan

Australian Clean Energy Summit 2015 Session: Transmission as an enabler of cleaner energy 16th July 2015

DNV GL © 16th July 2015

Industry consolidation through mergers

2

1864 2009

1867 2012

1927

1984

2013 onwards…


1665 responses

from across the electricity value chain

A survey with a global reach

3

Online survey

Quantitative & qualitative data

Interviews

TEPCO, E.On, NYISO, DONG

Survey participant profile

60% senior/manager level or above

Three dynamics

framework

71 countries represented (dark blue)

Expert input

Online survey

Quantitative & qualitative

Interviews

DONG, TEPCO, E.On, NYISO Analysis

Dynamic 1

Expert input

Dynamic 2

Dynamic 3


Big change is possible…

4

Four fifths of respondents believe that 70% renewables can be achieved

before 2050

Question

How quickly can the transition be made to a

high renewables electricity system (70% by

generation) which is also secure and affordable

in your market(s) of interest?

Two focus areas

1. Impact on T&D

2. Need for new

market rules


Finding: There is a split between the renewables sector and system/network

operators

5

Question: The transition to a renewables-

based electricity system (70% by generation)

poses the greatest challenges/ opportunities

to which stakeholders in your market(s) of

interest? (Choose up to 3 answers)

Note: For simplicity, only 6 of

the 13 groups are plotted

System and network operators feel

challenged, particularly at the

distribution level.

TSO: Transmission system operator

DSO: Distribution system operator

OEM: Original equipment manufacturer

IPP: Independent power producer

Perceived opportunity

Perc

eiv

ed c

hallenge


Finding: Grid is king

6

We move from

‘generation is king’ to

‘grid is king’

Question: Whose involvement do you think is

most vital to the transition to a renewables-

based electricity system (70% by generation)

in your market(s) of interest? (Choose up to 3

answers)

TSO: Transmission system operator

DSO: Distribution system operator

OEM: Original equipment manufacturer

IPP: Independent power producer

Importance according to whole group

Self-a

ssesed im

port

ance

(% selected in top 3)

(% w

ho s

ele

cte

d t

heir

ow

n g

roup in t

op 3

)

Note: For simplicity, only 6 of

the 13 groups are plotted


Impact on T&D

7


Characteristics of Future Transmission Grids

8

Transmission of

electricity over longer

distances

Resilience to extreme

weather events

Flexibility to handle

greater fluctuations in

power flow

Modularity to shorten

development

timeframes


Who pays the ferryman?

Currently

T&D grids typically have two-part fees based on

a) The capacity required by the connected customer

b) The metered usage of electricity by the connected customer

However

Growth of behind-the-meter storage and localized renewables significantly

reduces these fees

The grid transitions from being a primary source of electricity to a reserve (back

up) supplier

9

How should T&D charges be

determined?


How to price the reserves?

Consumers have different reliability requirements

– No interruptions industrial production facilities

– Some interruptions office blocks and shopping malls

Currently, consumers are not charged based on their reliability requirements

there is scope for differentiated payment schemes

Possible impact on

– Grid investments

– Regulatory principles for cost recovery

– Value of T&D companies

Watch this space!!!

10


Need for new market rules

11


Will the NEM need to change ?

Currently

Market rules are based on dispatch-able generation

Market price is set by the marginal bid price that meets demand

Designed to produce competitive prices and encourage investment in new plant

But…

What happens when market demand for electricity is zero or negative?

South Australia is expected to experience negative demand within the next 5 to

10 years due to the widespread deployment of renewable generation

12


Will the NEM still be relevant?

The move towards distributed generation brings the central dispatch basis of the

NEM into question – death of the NEM?

The marginal pricing principles may no longer produce meaningful results

The incentives for investment in new plant may disappear

The value of ancillary services (reserves, frequency response, voltage support)

will change

Prepare for some big changes to the market coming soon!!

13


Conclusions

14

Beyond

Integration

How to transition to the Grid of the

Future?

Does the market need to be re-

designed?



www.dnvgl.com

Thank you

15

Dr. Sanjay C. Kuttan

[email protected]

+65 9785 1198

Ceres Project

Utilising the Transmission Network

to facilitate Clean EnergyTom HanselmannCEC Wind Industry Forum

16th July 2015

Ceres Project;

Injecting large scale clean energy

directly into the transmission system at

a load centre

– challenges addressed by innovation

Ceres Project;

Injecting large scale clean energy

directly into the transmission system at

a load centre

– challenges addressed by innovation

2

Overview

� The Project

� Accessing the transmission network

� Interaction with the grid

� Coordinated WT control

� Supporting the system

� Summary

3

Location

4

Opportunity

A great wind farm site

5

Challenge

Accessing the grid

6

Challenge

Initial option for grid connection

7

• Connection into Hummocks via 67km 275kV circuit

• Would have limited the WF size

• Risks & Challenges:

� Reliant on progression of projected network

reinforcement

� Risks and costs associated with overhead

transmission works

� Significant constraints for multiple operational

scenarios, including overloads on the 132kV

distribution system.

� Contingency events would constrain the wind

farm as low as 120MW

• Connection into Hummocks via 67km 275kV circuit

• Would have limited the WF size

• Risks & Challenges:

� Reliant on progression of projected network

reinforcement

� Risks and costs associated with overhead

transmission works

� Significant constraints for multiple operational

scenarios, including overloads on the 132kV

distribution system.

� Contingency events would constrain the wind

farm as low as 120MW

Opportunity

8

Opportunity

Adelaide load centre

9

Gulf St Vincent

Opportunity

Adelaide load centre

� Proximity to load centre = favourable MLF

� Contribution to voltage control where synchronous

generation is reducing

� Proximity to load centre = favourable MLF

� Contribution to voltage control where synchronous

generation is reducing

10

The Project

� 197 x Senvion 3.4M114 WTs

� 600MW

� Green fields substation close to

“Parafield Gardens West”

� Bipole HVDC system including

earth return, 70km DC conductor

� 197 x Senvion 3.4M114 WTs

� 600MW

� Green fields substation close to

“Parafield Gardens West”

� Bipole HVDC system including

earth return, 70km DC conductor

11

The Project

12

HVDC Light Link (ABB)WTGs

(SENVION)

Grid Interface

(ElectraNet)Wind Farm

BoP

Yorke Side Adelaide SideSaint Vincent

Bay

PCCEarth return cable

V, freq V

The Project

13

Challenges

Interacting with the grid

� Significant size within the SA context

� Inherent challenges with distributed generation units is

exacerbated by unit size and geographical displacement for this

generating system

� Significant size within the SA context

� Inherent challenges with distributed generation units is

exacerbated by unit size and geographical displacement for this

generating system

14

Challenges

Interacting with the grid

15

� Many many simulation studies completed,…

… generally quite bland

� Of interest when fault is cleared by system protection tripping a

Ceres converter

� Following pages:

� Many many simulation studies completed,…

… generally quite bland

� Of interest when fault is cleared by system protection tripping a

Ceres converter

� Following pages: 100ms 3phase fault at PCC, cleared by tripping the corresponding half of Ceres

Innovation

Ceres; tailored control design

16

VPCC

P

� Improved outcomes if Ceres <250MW

drop

� Utilise temporary overload capability

of the surviving converter to provide

short-term P >350MW

� Temporarily switch PCC converter

from V to Q control to reserve MVA

capability for active current

� Return to V control after controlled

ramp down of P

� Improved outcomes if Ceres <250MW

drop

� Utilise temporary overload capability

of the surviving converter to provide

short-term P >350MW

� Temporarily switch PCC converter

from V to Q control to reserve MVA

capability for active current

� Return to V control after controlled

ramp down of P

Q

VDC

Other SA WFs: P response

17

Other SA WFs: V at WT bus

18

Ceres WF

19

Q

VWTVWF HVDC

PWT

� And here’s what the

Ceres WTs on the

surviving pole saw…

� And here’s what the

Ceres WTs on the

surviving pole saw…

Challenges

Coordinated control

� How to ramp down MW from 197 WTs rapidly in a coordinated

manner?

� Traditional WF communication has inherent lags, which creates

risk of overshoot or instability

� How to ramp down MW from 197 WTs rapidly in a coordinated

manner?

� Traditional WF communication has inherent lags, which creates

risk of overshoot or instability

20

Innovation

Coordinated control

21

Frequency (Hz)

Pow

er (

pu)

Challenges

Supporting the system

� WTs have ability to support system frequency

� Similarly the HVDC has ‘artificial inertia’ functionality

� Further work between Senvion – ABB to resolve how this can be

brought to bear

� WTs have ability to support system frequency

� Similarly the HVDC has ‘artificial inertia’ functionality

� Further work between Senvion – ABB to resolve how this can be

brought to bear

22

Summary

Ceres Wind Farm Project

23

� Opportunity to tap into

great renewable resource

� Leading technology to facilitate

connection of clean energy to the

transmission system

� Injecting sizeable generation

directly into a load centre

� Construction start next year

� Opportunity to tap into

great renewable resource

� Leading technology to facilitate

connection of clean energy to the

transmission system

� Injecting sizeable generation

directly into a load centre

� Construction start next year

ABB has supplied to more than half of the 190 HVDC projects

The track record of a global leader

60 HVDC Classic Projects since 195424 HVDC Upgrades since 199024 HVDC Light Projects since 1997

Troll 1&2, 3&4

Nelson River 2

CU-projectVancouver IslandPole 1

Pacific IntertiePacific IntertieUpgradingPacific IntertieExpansionIntermountain

Blackwater

Rio Madeira

Inga-Kolwezi

Brazil-ArgentinaInterconnection I&II

EnglishChannelDürnrohrSardinia-Italy

HighgateChâteauguay

Quebec-New England

Skagerrak 1-3

Konti-Skan

Baltic Cable

FennoSkan 1&2

Kontek

SwePol

ChaPad

Rihand-DelhiVindhyachal

SakumaGezhouba-Shanghai

Three Gorges-Shanghai

Leyte-LuzonBroken Hill

New Zealand 1&2

Gotland LightGotland 1-3

Murraylink

Eagle Pass

Tjæreborg

Hällsjön

Directlink

Cross SoundItaly-Greece

Rapid City

Vizag IIThree Gorges-Guandong

Estlink

Valhall

Cahora Bassa

SapeiSquare Butte

Sharyland &Railroad DC Tie

Three Gorges-Changzhou

Outaouais

Caprivi Link

Hülünbeir- LiaoningLingbao II Extension

Xiangjiaba-Shanghai

BorWin1

NorNed

Apollo Upgrade

East West Interconnector

IPP Upgrade

Itaipu

DolWin1, 2

NordBalt

Skagerrak 4

North East Agra

Jinping - SunanMackinac

Oklaunion

Åland

Celilo Upgrade

LitPol Link

Eel RiverMaritime Link

Madawaska

Caithness -Moray

Johan Sverdrup

NordLink

© ABB Group July 23, 2015|

Harness the Wind

Senvion Wind Turbine Generators

Thank you

Embracing a clean energy future

Greg Garvin

16 July 2015

About TransGrid

Embracing a clean energy future 2 /

> 12,900 km high voltage transmission lines

> 78 km of underground cables

> 99 substations

> 89 radio towers

> 1,200 km of optical fibre

> Supplying electricity to:

− 7 million residents

− 30,000 businesses

− 20 network customers

> Connection to Qld and Vic

TransGrid transmits 45% more energy than Victoria and peak

demand is approximately 30% higher

TransGrid transmits 40% more energy than Queensland and peak

demand is approximately 40% higher

Electricity demand in a low carbon future


Buildings

Transport

Industry

Other

Source: ClimateWorks, Pathways to deep decarbonisation in 2050, total Australian TWh

Value of the grid


Renewable growth


Maximum daily demand (2009-14)


March 2014 July 2009

48 days

Average

Peak >15%

MW

Impact of solar PV


Source: ENA Road to Fairer Prices April 2014

iDemand


iDemand can

offset the

equivalent of 40

households’

load at times of

peak

Access to iDemand


> Real-time updates of battery discharge,

solar generation and site via

www.transgrid.com.au/iDemand

> Live monitor enables users to download

data at 1 minute intervals

> Site tours for customers supports

conversation on how storage and

demand management can be better

integrated into the National Electricity

Market.

Live monitor for iDemand system

http://www.transgrid.com.au/iDemand


TransGrid is embracing the evolving network system

and supporting a clean energy future.

Examining a solar export market for Australia

Geoff James

Consultant

Pre-feasibility study

• Liaising with the Pilbara Development Commission as part of the Pilbara Cities Economic Diversification Framework – Describing the big picture

– Market impact of solar energy and regional trading

– Asian value proposition

– Engineering GW-scale solar farms and HVDC interconnectors

– Economic impact analysis for the Pilbara

– Partnering with Traditional Owners

• Project outcome: consortium for a full feasibility study

The team

• Samantha Mella and Geoff James – proponents

• Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation – traditional owners

• General Electric – RE supply, networks, economics, logistics

• Basslink – high-voltage direct-current (HVDC) technology, economics, international regulations

• Solar Choice – GW-scale solar farms

• National University of Singapore – ASEAN perspective

• Institut Teknologi Bandung – ASEAN perspective

Progression to explore and model

• The Feasibility Study – a comprehensive technical and economic analysis that will result in an investment-ready proposition for a Pilot Project

• The Pilot Project – construction and commissioning of the first 1-2 GW solar generation plant in the Pilbara region and the first GW-scale subsea HVDC interconnection to SE Asia

• The Incremental Build – the continuous and demand-driven build-out of solar generation and HVDC

Asian value proposition

• Installing high-capacity backbone links – A huge leap forward for the ASEAN Grid

– Supports energy trading and new economic centres

• Decarbonized energy security for SEA nations – Reduced emissions, pollution, health impacts

– Reduced land and water conflicts

• Expanding economic and strategic reach – Strategic partnership opportunity with Indonesia

– New opportunities for key regional economies

Australian value proposition

• Adding diversity to our economy – “Fossil fuels are finished” (Gilding 20150713)

• Engaging with traditional owners – “a sustainable, non-invasive use of Country” (Yamatji Marlpa

Aboriginal Corporation)

– Opportunities for leadership in remote communities

• Creating new infrastructure for the north – Supply chain, AC/DC grid, energy supplementation

– Use the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility?

Peter Davis, Executive Counsel, +61 9225 5354, [email protected]

16 JULY 2015

REGULATING THE FUTURE GRID

RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES

2

OVERVIEW

Recent trends

Next phase

Cost reflective network pricing / network tariff reform

Competition in metering and related services

Conclusions and role of industry

3

RECENT TRENDS

• Network investment

• Stalled or falling overall energy consumption

• Relative increases in peak demand

• Consumer generators

Inter-related energy market impacts

• SRES and feed-in tariffs

• State energy efficiency schemes

• NABERs and related schemes

Regulatory drivers

Outside influences

• Decline in manufacturing industry (notably aluminium)

• Technology - much cheaper solar PV

4

NEXT PHASE

• Introduction of Cost Reflective Network Pricing / Network tariff reform

• Reform of Competition in Meter Ownership and Replacement

Two rule change processes are of particular importance:

Wide ranging reforms of regulation affecting electricity networks, and clean energy’s interaction with the networks, currently in progress

From the clean energy industry’s perspective what regulatory changes will be key to the medium / long term future of the grid?

COST REFLECTIVE NETWORK PRICING

6

HISTORICAL NETWORK TARIFF STRUCTURE

Historical break-down:

• Flat or inclining block tariffs based on energy usage (c/kWh)

• Smaller fixed charge ($/day)

No recognition of consumer’s impact on cost of network capacity –drives cross subsidies and the famous “death spiral”

Impact on renewables?

Solar PV is cross-subsidised by other consumers:

• directly through DNSP recovery of cost of feed-in tariffs (cost of jurisdictional scheme)

• indirectly through solar PV household’s reduced usage charges and (notionally) unchanged peak usage

But a much larger cross subsidy is given to households using air-conditioning during peak periods

Reductionin use of energy

Reduced revenue

Higher per kWh price

7

WHAT WILL CRNP LOOK LIKE?

• Each tariff to recover long run marginal cost of providing network services to groups paying that tariff

• Minimise distortions to price signals for efficient usage decisions

• Consider impact on consumers of price changes and ability to mitigate impacts though usage choices

• Comply with jurisdictional pricing obligations

PRINCIPLES

• Capacity / demand charge – based on the customer’s recorded maximum demand (in kW) during peak periods over a prior period

• Time of use charge – more closely ties applicable tariff rates (variable kWh) to time of use including provision for ‘critical peaks’ that may be area specific for large customers

• Network access charge – a flat charge for ongoing connection, not usage or capacity based (in $/day)

TARIFF OPTIONS

AEMC has set the ‘principles’. Actual tariff structure is evolving. Implementation triggers risks and potential benefits for clean energy

8

CRNP AND CLEAN ENERGY INDUSTRY

Increase in Time of Use and Capacity Charges?

Solar PV:

• increases value of solar PV that produces at peak times such as north-facing commercial PV (commercial load peaks earlier in the day) or west-facing residential PV (potentially a new market).

• reduces value of solar PV that doesn’t coincide with peak

Storage:

• greatly enhances value of storage due to ability to reduce peak demand

Increase in Network Access Charges?

• blunt instrument

• won’t recognise value of solar, won’t support storage

• doesn’t support efficient usage decisions –consumers cannot respond

Causes for concern:

• SA Power Networks $100 p.a. charge for PV Users (rejected by AER)

• Ergon and Energex – significant increases in fixed (per day) network charges for C&I and residential (rather than TUOS or Peak Demand charges)

• Note: regulatory approvals and consultation obligations

9

CRNP TIMING AND CONSTRAINTS

• Prepare proposed Tariff Structure Statement:• Victoria: 25 September 2015• Others 25 November 2015• Consult with industry participants and consumers• Implementation of new tariff structures in 2017

Timing

• ‘Soft’ implementation (e.g. opt-in, voluntary measures)• Side-constraints and requirement to consider customer impacts could water down

price signals• Absence of advanced meters – risk of overreliance on fixed charges and

consequential adverse impact on clean energy uptake

Constraints on CRNP

COMPETITION IN METERING

11

• Each of these deficiencies is a major blocker to effective CRNP and network demand management

• Advanced meters address all the above deficiencies and can allow real-time exchange of information and control of enabled appliances

• Other than Victoria, very few small customers have advanced / smart meters

• Most small customers have meters that:

– don’t record peak demand;

– don’t record when energy is used; and

– require a physical reading to be taken

CURRENT STATE OF METERING

12

METER INSTALLATION TYPES

1 - 3 from 750MWh to greater than 1000GWh

• Remote read• Records 30 minute interval energy

flows in both direction

• FRMP (usually retailer) may choose to be Responsible Person or may request network owner or third party to do so

4 Less than 750MWh

• Remote read• Records 30 minute interval energy

flows in both direction

• FRMP (usually retailer) may choose to be Responsible Person or may request LNSP or third party to do so

5 Less than 160MWh

• Manual read• Interval Meters (Victorian AMI

deemed Type 5 under NER i.e. exclusive to LNSP)

• LNSP (network owner) Responsible Person only

6 Less than 160MWh

• Manual read• Accumulation meter

• LNSP (network owner)Responsible Person only

TYPE LOAD (P.A.) TECHNOLOGY REQUIRED RESPONSIBLE PERSON

13

OVERVIEW OF CHANGES

• Designed to facilitate market-led deployment of advanced meters

• New ‘metering co-ordinator’ role responsible for arranging:

– installation, provision and maintenance of metering installation

– collection, processing and delivery of metering data provision.

• May be appointed by large customer or retailer (for small customer sites) but not the distributor.

• Increase deployment of advanced meters by prescribing that:

– all new premises will have an advanced meter installed

– all replacement meters will be advanced meters

– retailers will be able to conduct a ‘roll-out’ of advanced meters to all their customers (other than those who opt out)

• Development of market protocol for open access and common communications

Draft rule: 26 March 2015

Proposed Commencement: 1 July 2017

14

ISSUES AND DRAFT RULE POSITION

Lack of competition

•Only LNSPs can provide type 5 or 6 meters. If LNSPs provide type 4 they lose right to control provision of meter services. This reduces the incentive on LNSPs to provide these meters.

•MC will now be able to arrange meters for types 5 or 6 and retailers / customers will be able to decide on replacement with type 4

Charging

•LNSPs’ metering charges were bundled with network charges and not visible to customers. This sometimes resulted in double payment where customers moved to type 4.

•This has now been addressed (or soon will be) in all NEM jurisdictions (separate to rule change).

Exit fees

•Most small customer meters are owned by the network. Lack of clarity around compensation for meter removal / upgrade. The same issue applies if, having supplied a meter, a retailer then loses the customer.

•The AEMC has indicated that the AER should include provisions around calculation of exit fees in its determination

Distribution ring-fencing

•Standing requirement that networks ring-fence contestable operations (e.g. generation, retail, unregulated metering services).

•Any metering co-ordinator role should be ring-fenced from rest of distribution business – arrangements to be approved by the AER

15

Role for industry:

• Consider commercial possibilities of the MC role:

– with network owners (aggregate and offer demand management)

– with retailers for wholesale market benefits

• Note that retailers appoint MCs for small customer sites (under draft rule – for review 3 years after implementation)

• Ring-fencing requirements for retailers and distributors – separate vehicles for MC entities

Benefits of advanced metering:

• supports innovative ways for customers to control energy usage

• is critical for effective CRNP and success of battery storage

• facilitates innovative demand management systems for NSPs

METERING AND CLEAN ENERGY INDUSTRY

Development of standard term framework agreements to govern:• metering co-ordinator terms

and conditions• ownership of meters and

changeover (exit fees)

16

CONCLUSIONS

• The grid is currently undergoing a period of widespread regulatory change

• CRNP and metering reforms, if implemented in the right way, could strongly support the success of storage and wider role for distributed generation

• Potential to create a more robust network, a cleaner energy mix and pricing that is more equitable

• Clean energy industry role?

– demonstrate the value of storage for networks, retailers and customers

– pursue opportunities arising from metering competition and the new metering co-ordinator role

– lobby to ensure reformed network tariffs are truly cost reflective

– pursue innovative contractual arrangements while regulation catches up

17

DISCLAIMER

The contents of this publication, current at the date of publication set out in this document, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action based on this publication.

Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills, an Australian Partnership, are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills.

© Herbert Smith Freehills 2015

Breaking the Gridlock Quantum Shift in Supply Chain - How disruptive technologies are reshaping the electricity industry and how to adapt?

Craig Chambers Market Sector Director – Power Generation

Overview

Distributed NEM – A Quantum Shift

Future scenarios

Adaptation Considerations

The Quantum Shift

Cause

• Commercialisation and rapid uptake of DER

• Slow regulatory change and pollicisation of climate change and the electricity sector

• Inaccurate forecasting, lack of data transparency and awareness of the consumer

• Motivation to maintain the status quo

• The system is now grid not generation centric

Effect

• Poor asset utilisation and overinvestment

• Unintended power quality and system issues

• Inaccurate Demand Forecasting

• Delayed reform and privatisation

• Lack of competition

• Investment risk, costs and instability

Transmission & DistributionWholesale End User

Automotive

Commercial & Industrial

Residential

Definition of DER

Energy EfficiencyLighting

Smart Appliances

Building Efficiency

Categories Examples

Distributed Generation

Solar

CHP

Wind

Demand ResponseDSM

Electric Vehicles

Energy Storage

Smart GridsMicrogrids

Smart Devices

Virtual power stations

DER

StorageRenewables

Demand Side Market

Demand Management

Smart Grids

Energy Efficiency

Electric Vehicles

Solar Market Story

60c tariff commenced


feed-in tariff deadline for both schemes


8c tariff commenced

8c tariff expires

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

No

. PV

Sys

tem

s In

stal

led

(‘0

00

)

NSW

QLD

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Tho

usa

nd

s

Tho

usa

nd

s

Installed CapacityTotal Installations

Solar Market Story (cont.)

2028

2016

2024

2028 2021

~

2018 2030

FiT Expiry Year

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

NT ACT TAS WA SA VIC NSW QLD

Tho

usa

nd

s

Sum of capacity (kW) Sum of installations

DER Forecasted Trends

Source: AEMO 2015

o Energy efficiency is an unknown quantity.

o PV will continue to grow significantly in residential applications

o EVs & Storage will influence peak load and hence future capacity investment requirements.

o DER has the ability to reduce Transmission losses (MLF) and improve DLF.

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

Annual DER Consumption Forecast (AEMO)

TransmissionLosses - ARENA

Storage - AECOM - ARENA

Storage - ARENA

SmallNonScheduledGeneration - ARENA

RooftopPV - Residential

RooftopPV - Commercial

EnergyEfficiency - ARENA

Future of Utility Reactions

Defensive Proactive

Invest up to meter Invest up to meter

Deter investment behind the meter

Defensive tariff approach

Limited or no engagement

React to regulatory change

Invest behind the meter

Cost reflective / incentive pricing

Consistent engagement

Promote regulatory change

Partner / acquire change agents

Value adding services

Factors Proactive Industry Adaptation

Defensive Unplanned Uptake

RAB

Peak Demand

Energy Demand

Load Factor

Generation

Demand Forecasting

Cost of electricity

Probable futures outcomes…

Slow Growth

Stabilise/Moderate Growth

Growth

High Growth

Rapid Decline

Centralise

Decentralise (targeted)

Degrades Improves

Greater Certainty Continued uncertainty

Stabilise Increase

Centralise

Decentralise (disruptive)

Stabilise or declines

Global DER Evolution

USA - California Being the national leader of installed PV capacity California DER uptake is spurred by renewable targets and they are pursuing mandates to ensure DNSPs better integrate DER onto the grid.

Germany Traditional coal and gas fired power stations are closing as a result of aggressive renewable targets. >50% of the countries capacity is now DG meaning major reforms are underway.

USA – New York Fears of repeated power outages caused by natural disasters such as Hurricane Sandy are the drive behind NY states Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) program.

Japan Rising power prices and a consumer focus on self-sufficiency post the Fukushima nuclear disasters has lead to greater uptake of DER and micro-grids.

India Focus is on using DER, renewables and smart technologies to achieve their goal of electricity supply to 100% of the population by 2027.

DER Adaptation Considerations

Disaggregate to Re-aggregate - Consider the value of an

independent distribution planner and operator and rethinking ring fencing rules.

Redefine Planning & Rules - Remove incentive bias against DER

by balancing regulatory frameworks to enable the integration of DER

Network Data Access - Greater distribution system data is

required to understand the value of DER and real of cost to service.

Consumption Data Transparency - Granular historical & real-time

consumption and DER data will inform market operation.

Value DER - Measure and monetise the

locational and diurnal value (+/-) of DER in the system.

Realign the Utility and Consumer - Enable the shared benefits of DER

to be attained across the value chain through evolved structures.

From Energy to Power - Tariffs transition from primarily

energy based (kWh) to power or capacity demand based (kW) through advanced metering and making it easier for the consumer.

Understand the Consumer - Consult with consumers as not just

a load and consider the social equity of cost reflectivity.

Breaking the Gridlock

Craft

a Dem

and Side

Energy M

arket (

DSEM

)

Cure the Tariff DisorderW

hole o

f Sys

tem

Pla

nning

Transparency is the new green

Regulatory Landscape

• Existing frameworks assume a linear supply chain from a central source.

• Network are built to supply peak and reliability standards but don't envisage the impact or use of DER (no virtual net metering available).

• Rules currently limit economic outcomes for the consumers (LV/MV contestability, enable wheeling, redefine ring fencing & licenses, DLF)

• Significant policy and regulatory uncertainty limits technology innovation and progress on smart grid functionality.

• Incomplete information transparency limits competition and understanding the real value (+/-) of DER

• Cost reflectivity is progress but isnt real tariff reform (think capacity charges not energy, link network and retail tariffs)

Conclusion – Why act now?

• Industry needs to adapt through the inclusion of DER in planning and function, not see it as an nuisance or add-on.

• To maximise potential from DER, it is important to get the correct market incentive and frameworks in place.

• While customers and industry are unable to access the correct economic drivers for projects, inefficient investment is inevitable.

• Continued untargeted uptake of DER is a missed opportunity for the industry.

• Regulatory change is slow and industry shouldn’t wait for the regulator to adapt.

• Bringing this transition to fruition will require participation, dialogue, and collaboration among all stakeholders and more data….

GLOBAL WIND MARKETS

Presentation to: Australian clean energy summit 2015 Day 2

GLOBAL WIND MARKETS

• Global status update • Australian focus • Where to from here

ANNUAL INSTALLED CAPACITY

CUMULATIVE INSTALLED CAPACITY

INSTALLED CAPACITY

ANNUAL MARKET FORECAST

CAPACITY AND CAPACITY PER CAPITA

NEW INVESTMENT IN CLEAN ENERGY ($B)

WIND POWER IN AUSTRALIA

INVESTMENT

AUSTRALIAN INVESTMENT

Existing annual generation built under the LRET 16,000 GWh

New generation needed to meet 33,000 GWh by 2020 LRET 17,000 GWh

New capacity needed to meet 2020 LRET 6,000 MW

PROGRESS TOWARDS THE LRET

• The Clean Energy Australia report records all renewable energy generation across Australia,

including that not supported by the Renewable Energy Target.

• This is mostly Hydro built before 1997 and accounts for between 13,000 – 15,000 GWh of

renewable energy generation per year.

• The table below outlines progress to meet the revised LRET of 33,000 GWh by 2020.

THE FUTURE OF AUSTRALIAN WIND

Key issues to consider • Emissions targets out of Paris COP • Retiring old plant • Protecting wind’s reputation in the community

• Benefit sharing • Transparency

• Evolving regulation

DNV GL © 16th July 2015 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER DNV GL © 16th July 2015

A broad overview of wind policy and finance across global markets

1

Dr. Graham Slack

Australian Clean Energy Summit 2015 Session: Global Wind Markets 16th July 2015

DNV GL © 16th July 2015 2

1864 2009

1867 2012

1927

1984

2013 onwards…


Dynamics of wind and solar growth

3

GNI per capita > $11,905

GNI per capita < $11,905


Distribution of global wind energy

4

GNI per capita > $11,905 GNI per capita < $11,905


Renewable Energy Support Mechanisms What are countries around the world doing?

5


Renewable Energy Support Mechanisms

6

“Renewables 2014 Global Status Report”, REN21

Remains popular, as a

simple and effective

support mechanism

On the increase as wind

and solar become

increasingly competitive

with conventional

generation technologies

Net Metering on the rise,

largely driven by drop in

solar costs making rooftop

solar commercially viable


Larger Turbines

Low wind sites

Buying criteria

Implications on

Huge regional variation, but some patterns evident:

• Trend towards larger turbines (> 2 MW)

• Increasing incidence of low wind sites (IEC class II/III)

• Buying criteria: Price and “bankability” (driven by finance)

(tighter project finance criteria > higher quality threshold)

Contracting Models

O+M arrangements

OEM Consolidation


Example of US Market

Over the next decade steady growth

in the deployment of larger capacity

turbines is expected.

Blade technology is expected to

continue to evolve and lead to larger

rotors, increased capacity factor

Benefits of shared O&M savings may

lead to higher power density

possible from larger turbines


• Limited geographical areas of Class II/III sites –

clusters of wind farm sites in same areas

• For capacity factor – height and large rotors

• Interest in tall hub heights ~ 150m/160m

• Large rotors – perhaps 130/140m

• ie Swept area between 80/90m and 220/230m!

- high monitoring costs

• Increased energy sensitivity: small error in predicted

wind speed could lead to high errors in output

Eg Thailand


2011 – Present: In response to

constrained supply/rising pricing, turbine

manufacturers invested in manufacturing

capacity. Slowdown in some key markets

resulted in a broadly oversupplied

international market placing downward

pressure on pricing. Furthermore, low

wholesale electricity pricing continues to

constrain the ability for manufacturers

raise prices .

2006 -2010: rapid growth in installations

New manufacturing capacity insufficient to

meet demand > undersupply which raised

prices. Increase in commodity prices,

including steel which is a key component of

turbine towers and other sub-components,

contributing to higher manufacturing costs.

Total of basic turbine costs including all turbine components, delivery to site, basic SCADA, commissioning and basic warranty. Excludes TSA options, BoP costs and extended warranty.

(US Data))


Three categories :

• Supply only • Supply & Installation • Turnkey / Full EPC (Engineering

Procurement Construction)

• Mature/established markets, multi-contracts (i.e. Supply-Only or Supply & Installation, from a wind turbine OEM’s point of view), are may be employed

• In emerging markets, EPC contracts are more common – less experienced sub-contractors. EPC contracts are more expensive, but the risk is lower – from the project developers perspective.

Turnkey / Full EPC

Roads, crane pads and drainage WTG foundations

Building for SCADA and switch gears Underground MV cable network

Copper cable earth network Communication lines and system

Supply and Installation

Wind turbine components installation (incl. cranes and crew)

Supply Only Wind turbine components

(sometimes excl. transport to site) SCADA system

Installation supervision Commissioning

Optionals Met Mast

Transformer station HV line

Com

ple

xit

y /

Ris

k

Scope

BoP


13

Drivers: • O+M estimated to be ~ US $10 Bn business by 2016 • Historically dominated by OEMs • Trend to longer term contracts; 2 years >10 years • Asset owners will likely have a mix of turbine models • Cost of failure is increasingly large as turbine size continue to increase • Evolution of yield based guarantees requires an enhanced level of commercial

and technical know-how to ensure equitable terms • New O&M technologies and software have come to market in the last five

years in the fields of predictive maintenance, data analysis, lifetime extension and asset optimisation.

• Eg nacelle lidar technology to assess/optimise the performance of wind turbines • Condition monitoring • Blade enhancements • Control enhancements


Consolidation/co-operation among turbine manufacturers has been a strong feature in 2014

The number of wind-turbine suppliers in business globally has fallen sharply over the past decade

or so, as some were swallowed by larger rivals. A large number of suppliers have exited the wind

business in the past two years

A number of characteristics of the wind turbine business suggest it will become further concentrated:

Wind turbines are complex capital goods. It is difficult to evaluate the true cost of the turbine without years

of operation, which is a big reason project finance is often only available for “bankable” turbines.

Turbines exhibit economies of scale in purchasing. Many of the major components in wind turbines, including

gearboxes, bearings, blades, shafts, and various forgings and castings, are unique to the particular turbine

model. Manufacturers with large, steady volumes are able to negotiate better pricing for these components.

Wind turbines benefit from a learning curve effect, if not in the initial manufacture of the turbine then in how

to make turbines reliable and easy to maintain under a wide variety of operating environments.

Wind turbines may benefit from economies of scope. Bundling of EPC services, balance of plant equipment,

seller financing, and O&M services are increasingly common. Organizations that can offer all these services

may be more appealing to customers.

14


Key Offshore markets

16

Established

Emerging

Stalled


Different policy drivers

US – Poor drivers at Federal level ->

State important

Japan – Energy security with

industrial benefits

China – Industrial benefits

important but also energy

France – industry policy is key

Germany – mix of anti-

nuclear/climate change and

industrial benefits UK – mix of EU targets/climate

change mitigation, energy security

and industrial benefit


Different Technical Challenges - Depth

18

China - Intertidal

Germany &

Scotland


Also know as Cyclones, Typhoons and Hurricanes

Southern China and Japan get more Tropical Cyclones than

anywhere on the planet

Different Technical Challenges - Cyclones


Growth of wind energy is global – in both rich and poor countries

Geographically very diverse

Variety of support mechanisms

Offshore is an important sub-set, with different policy drivers

Some patterns are evident:

• Trend towards larger turbines (> 2 MW)

• Increasing incidence of low wind sites (IEC class II/III)

• Buying criteria: Price and “bankability” (driven by finance)

(tighter project finance criteria > higher quality threshold)



www.dnvgl.com

21

Dr. Graham Slack

[email protected]

Global Wind Markets

July 2015

Roger Price

Chief Executive Officer

Windlab Limited

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=9CAU4mVYR_jDYM&tbnid=KrAfNe5xJ1T9oM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.windlab.com/&ei=0q4VU_GnCqWf7AbCgoD4DA&bvm=bv.62286460,d.ZGU&psig=AFQjCNH8bjFF9XRC8OgZT-tjXK3fEQnbcg&ust=1394016291136379

WINDLAB

Global wind energy development

CSIRO Spin out

World leading atmospheric modelling

technology

Active in 8 Countries, 35 employees

More than 7,000MW and 60 projects of

onshore wind farms in development

O MW 3000 MW 500 MW 8,00OMW

Capacity operating/under construction

520MW

Capacity currently permitted

Capacity sold

Capacity under development

1,420MW

>3,000MW

7,525MW

Global Offices

Portfolio Summary

100m x 100m South African Wind Atlas

GLOBAL RENEWABLE ENERGY CAPACITY

41.5

54

63.8

80.8 88.1

82.2

94.2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Additional Capacity GWs

Source Data: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

51.5GW WIND

WHERE TO FROM HERE!!

65% 2% 5%

7%

21%

0.5%

Fossil Fuels Solar Wind Nuclear Hydro Others

36%

26%

14%

4%

14% 6%

Fossil Fuels Solar Wind Nuclear Hydro Others

2012 2040

5,584GW 14,216GW

Source: BNEF New Energy Outlook 2015

• Additional 9.8TW by 2040 • 2 TW of Wind • 60% renewable • 80% non-OECD

Global Capacity

AFRICA

1.5 Billion people by 2020

Sub Saharan Africa < 30% electrification

World Bank estimates 70GW of capacity by

2020 – less than 20GW identified

Phenomenal renewable resources;

Wind

Solar

Geothermal

Wind cheapest and fastest to deploy

Windlab has early stage projects in

Mozambique, Tanzania and Kenya

GDP Growth

10.5%

5.7%

7%

7.4% 26

SOUTH AFRICA

2030 Strategic Integrated Resource Plan

Severe energy deficit; deep and persistent

load shedding

9,000MW of state owned coal development

Nuclear??

Round 5 REIPPPP October 2015

Further 6,300MW of renewable (wind, solar

and others) by 2020, approx. 50% Wind.

REIPPPP Wind Projects

Bid Round Award Date No. of Projects

Capacity (MWs)

Ave Bid Price

(US$/MW1)

Round 1 Dec ’11 8 635 $91.50

Round 2 May ’13 7 559 $71.75

Round 3 Nov ’13 7 787 $57.60

Round 4 Apr ’15 12 1,363 $52.80

34 3,344 1. Assumes fixed FX of 12.5

SOUTH AFRICA Cont….

2013 Global PPP program of the year

70% Price; 30% LED

Bid Thresholds

40% local ownership

18% BBBEE ownership

40% local content

US$6Bn investment and ‘000s of jobs

Community ownership

Rounds 1 – 3 Predominantly Project Financed

Rounds 4 & 5 Predominantly Balance Sheet Financed

Round 1 -3 sources of Debt

CHALLENGE: - Grid and Margin Compression

SUB SAHARAN AFRICA

SSA market strong growth

Extremely good wind resources in East Africa

Complements Hydro

Network Development Plans

FiTs

Auctions

Early IPPs/BOT schemes

Distributed generation and micro-grid

opportunities

Challenges

Grid

Finance

+5GW

+10GW

+2GW + export 26

+12GW

Total Capacity Additions

THANK YOU

Gerard Pike, Partner, +61 3 9288 1974, [email protected]

JULY 2015 UPDATE

PROJECT FINANCING OF LARGE-SCALE WIND PROJECTS IN AUSTRALIA

LIQUIDITY AND PRICE BUT ONLY A FEW CLOSED DEALS

2

OVERVIEW OF FINANCINGS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS

• Less than a handful of recent greenfields projects have been project

financed

• Only those wind projects that were successful in the recent ACT Wind

Auction were project financed in 2014/15

• However, there have been numerous ‘opportunistic’ refinancings during

the same period. These have been encouraged by aggressive bank

pricing (lower upfronts and margins), the availability of longer tenor debt

and more ‘borrower-friendly’ terms

3

CURRENT STATE OF THE PROJECT FINANCE MARKET

• There is currently a very liquid and competitive debt market for renewables deals

and borrowers can find attractive terms

• There are numerous overseas banks active in the Australian market offering very

keen pricing - an Australian bank is potentially no longer required to participate in

every syndicate

• However, having a local bank agent/security trustee is generally still easier to

manage

• Longer tenor debt (ie greater than 5 years) is becoming an attractive and possible

option for borrowers depending on offtake arrangements

• We have recently seen a few wind farms refinanced exclusively by means of long

tenor debt provided by private US investors or US Private Placements

4

HURDLES TO ACCESSING NON-BANK DEBT SOURCES

• In order to attract private US investors or to access the USPP market, borrowers will at a minimum

need to secure a long-term off-take with a creditworthy counterparty. USPP investors will generally

not take construction risk and prefer operational risks to be limited

• Can projects with the benefit of the ACT FiT be banked in the USPP market post construction?

• Potential considerations for longer tenor non-bank debt:

– where longer tenor non-bank debt sits alongside shorter bank debt tranches consider:

• voting regimes

• refinancing flexibility for shorter tenor tranche

– swap break rights and willingness of banks to take an orphan swap position

– treatment of cross-currency swaps

– make wholes/prepayment flexibility

– different levels of responsiveness of non-commercial bank investors can restrict operational

flexibility

5

PROJECT FINANCING DEALS WITH A FEED-IN TARIFF

Key bankability considerations

• Creditworthiness of the FiT entity/counterparty to the PPA

• Risk of:

– repeal of the FiT and/or revocation of the PPA

– adverse change in the RET legislation

– inadequate compensation in each of the above circumstances

– failing to achieve commercial operations by the applicable milestone date

• Robust tripartite arrangements and financier step-in/cure rights

Additional equity consideration

Sometimes strict consent requirements for change in control/equity selldown

6

TREATMENT OF REGULATORY RISK ON RECENT DEALS

• Risk mitigants currently employed by financiers in the Australian market:

– FiT Repeal Review Event: occurs if the relevant feed-in tariff legislation is repealed

or is amended in an adverse manner

– RET Review Event: occurs if the RET is repealed or is amended in an adverse

manner (NB: Despite the recent RET deal and legislated amendments to the target,

banks still insist on this protection)

• ‘Review Events’ are essentially events of default with long cure periods (often in excess

of 180 days). Borrowers are generally required to consult with their banks to determine

how best to deal with the consequences of the particular event

• Failure to reach agreement by the end of the agreed review period will generally result in

either: (1) the debt facilities being resized by way of a cash sweep; or (2) the principal

outstanding under the debt facilities becoming due and payable

7

MAIN POINTS OF LEGAL NEGOTIATION

• Construction covenants linked to EPC contract and FiT/PPA

• Review Events

• change in law

• compensation events

• credit downgrade of offtaker

• change in control of borrower

• Distribution lock-up covenants

• Events of Default (triggers)

• Operational control covenants

• Bank tripartite requirements with third parties

• Negotiations can be streamlined with experienced lawyers

8

OUTLOOK FOR UPCOMING PERIOD

• Resurgence of traditional greenfields wind project financings in Australia

largely dependent on the availability of long term power purchase

agreements and/or legislated feed-in-tariffs for large-scale renewables

(such as the ACT’s regime)

• Market may change if financiers begin to take a less conservative view on

merchant price risk

• Early indications suggest the outlook for the coming year is positive post

RET amendments

9

HERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS

• We offer an expert ‘one stop legal shop’ for renewables projects from

planning and property, construction to project finance

• Are leaders in the market acting on:

• first project financed wind farms in Australia, India and the Philippines

• first project financed large-scale solar projects in Australia

• all three successful projects in the latest ACT wind auctions

• We act for developers, equity investors, builders and suppliers and

financiers.

Imagination at work.

Corey Ramm

Director, Sales & Project Finance

Renewable energy financing in Australia

GE & Renewables

3

Technology

~25,400 wind

turbines

Equivalent to

~40.9 GW of

installed capacity

globally

31 countries

>98% availability

Investment

- Invested $10Bn in

renewable energy

globally

- $8Bn in wind

commitments

- $1.8Bn in solar

commitments

- 75% equity / 25%

debt

Local Experience

- Mumbida wind

farm

- Boco Rock wind

farm

- Ararat wind farm

- Greenough solar

Significant investment to be unlocked

• Three major positive project announcements

since the RET was passed amounting to

1GW in new capacity :

Ararat

White Rock

Ceres

• Total investment quoted at ~$2BN.

• Majority of renewable projects are reliant on

third party project financing.

Ararat wind farm • First post RET wind farm to reach financial close.

• Employ around 165 during construction and 13 once operating.

• Powering 123,000 homes.

• 235MW development. 80MWs contracted under ACT FiT.

• Highly competitive LCOE.

Competitive financing

Evolution of GE technology – 3.2MW WTG

Collaboration between developer and OEM

• ~$450MM funded by equity.

• Capital sourced from RES (UK), Partners Group (Swiss), OP Trust (Canada) and GE (US).

• All sophisticated investors. Some new to wind/renewables in Australia.

Australian renewables attractive to offshore equity

Australia US India

Credit rating AAA AA+ BBB-

Interest rates 3% <1% 7%

GDP growth 2-3% 1-2% 6-8%

Inflation 2-3% 1-2% 5-6%

Source: IRENA Renewable Energy Target Setting Report dated June 2015

Themes for upcoming projects • Focus on lower LCOE projects – 6GW build for revised RET compared to 10GW previously.

This in the context of a 20GW development pipeline.

• Expectation of shorter PPA’s (given time horizon to 2030).

• Larger reliance on merchant cash flows. Funding projects with a view to a PPA.

• Previous forecasts may have been optimistic although actual data for structural market

changes (i.e. RET, LNG, rooftop solar, aggregate demand) can now be seen so more

informed views can be taken.

• Financing / refinancing into part merchant structures.

• Continued desire for longer term debt (e.g. Hallett 2) hampered by 5 year liquidity. Longer

PPA deals can be structured to investment grade post construction to attract capital markets

liquidity.

• Financing costs continue to make up significant portion of LCOE.

• Australia continues to be a place of interest for foreign investment (e.g. Ararat). Renewables is

a well liked sector.

LGC’s as competitive as ever

• 5+GWs of DA approved projects.

• Historic wind PPA’s struck at $90-120 (escalated).

• ACT benchmarks between $81.50-$93 (flat):

Macro factors (still relatively strong AUD / lower funding costs)

Highly competitive EPC market

Technology improvements

Competitively priced offshore capital

• Greenfield projects can still provide 13+ years of LGCs. Delaying will lead to a shorter

payback and possibly a higher price.

Collaboration will deliver the best projects

• Provide guidance on

region/approach for

procurement.

Offtakers

Developers

OEMs Equity

investors

Banks • Streamline development

portfolio and focus

development capital.

• Early introduction of

equity.

• Potential to co-fund

development.

• Construction equity

sourced at an early

stage.

• Early engagement with

OEM’s to optimise site

and commercialize

structure.

• Banks engaged earlier

through project

commercialisation

process.

In summary

10

• Model for financing projects

has changed.

• Most value from LGC’s if

projects are supported now.

• Integrated development/

equipment/ services can

maximize value for

developers.

• Collaboration between

parties will achieve best

results.

Australian’s clean energy future is linked to careful community engagement

Ketan Joshi, Research and Communications Officer

16/07/2015


Balancing Science and Sentiment

2

http://www.tripadvisor.com.au/Hotel_Review-g1725095-d1723516-Reviews-Codrington_Gardens-Codrington_Victoria.html

The Codrington Bed and Breakfast

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

3 Source http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-10/clay-wi-fi-might-not-hurt-us-but-fear-of-it-certainly-does/6607860

Health fears emerge around smart meters, due to natural human reactions

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

4 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/reports-of-illness-prompt-audit-of-smart-meter-radiation/story-fni0fit3-1226990214029

http://www.peoplepowervictoria.org.au/charter

Smart meter health fears emerged quickly in Victoria

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

5 Source http://dynam-it.com/lennart/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2013/07/factors_in_rp_risk_analysis.pdf

http://www.susannahertrich.com/risk.php

We perceive greater risk from things that we don’t control

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

6

http://www.susannahertrich.com/risk.php

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cartoon/2014/jun/02/first-dog-cartoon-climate

Compare the government policy response to national security and climate change

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

7

Evidence reviews, acoustic measurements and legal cases consistently contradict health fears

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants (2013)

Victorian Department of Health (2013)

NSW Health (2013)

Worksafe Victoria (2013)

Doctors for the Environment Australia (2011)

Climate and Health Alliance (2012)

Public Health Association of Australia (2013)

South Australian Environmental Protection Agency (2013)

National Health and Medical Research Council (2014)

Australian Medical Association (2014)

http://www.energyandpolicy.org/overview-of-wind-

health-court-cases

8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHeY-JnDsY8

http://stateandcapitol.bangordailynews.com/2014/04/09/bills-to-give-residents-of-unorganized-territory-more-say-in-wind-deals-are-dead/

Themes of invasion and permission dominate anti-windfarm messaging

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

9

Residents nominated an acoustician to compare noise to diarised symptoms. Media coverage ensued….

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/seeking-

peace-from-turbine-turbulence/story-e6frg6xf-1227294803563

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/end-the-smug-

untouchability-of-the-wind-industry/story-e6frg6zo-1227390301649

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/call-to-

subject-others-to-wind-farm-noise/story-e6frg6xf-1227278743162

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/canadian-

research-boosts-coopers-case-on-turbines/story-e6frg8y6-

1227236182046

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/legal-move-

threatened-over-media-watch-report/story-fna045gd-1227234600320

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-17/business-as-usual-for-wind-

farm-operator-despite/6126018

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-21/wind-turbine-study-cape-

bridgewater/6030044

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/turbine-

study-not-meant-to-be-scientific/story-e6frg6xf-1227285240322

10

Anti-windfarm messaging

@KetanJ0 #ACES2015 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-15/euro-wind-power/6620936

11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1TzQMEfDL8

We won’t see deep cuts to carbon emissions without an

enhanced and consistent focus on community

engagement and ownership, combined with a clear

understanding of the importance of high quality science.

Twitter - @KetanJ0

Email: [email protected]

Disclaimer

This publication is issued by Infigen Energy Limited (“IEL”), Infigen Energy (Bermuda) Limited (“IEBL”) and Infigen Energy Trust (“IET”), with

Infigen Energy RE Limited (“IERL”) as responsible entity of IET (collectively “Infigen”). Infigen and its related entities, directors, officers and

employees (collectively “Infigen Entities”) do not accept, and expressly disclaim, any liability whatsoever (including for negligence) for any loss

howsoever arising from any use of this publication or its contents. This publication is not intended to constitute legal, tax or accounting advice or

opinion. No representation or warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the accuracy, completeness or thoroughness of the content of the

information. The recipient should consult with its own legal, tax or accounting advisers as to the accuracy and application of the information

contained herein and should conduct its own due diligence and other enquiries in relation to such information.

The information in this presentation has not been independently verified by the Infigen Entities. The Infigen Entities disclaim any responsibility for

any errors or omissions in such information, including the financial calculations, projections and forecasts. No representation or warranty is made

by or on behalf of the Infigen Entities that any projection, forecast, calculation, forward-looking statement, assumption or estimate contained in

this presentation should or will be achieved. None of the Infigen Entities guarantee the performance of Infigen, the repayment of capital or a

particular rate of return on Infigen Stapled Securities.

IEL and IEBL are not licensed to provide financial product advice. This publication is for general information only and does not constitute financial

product advice, including personal financial product advice, or an offer, invitation or recommendation in respect of securities, by IEL, IEBL or any

other Infigen Entities. Please note that, in providing this presentation, the Infigen Entities have not considered the objectives, financial position or

needs of the recipient. The recipient should obtain and rely on its own professional advice from its tax, legal, accounting and other professional

advisers in respect of the recipient’s objectives, financial position or needs.

This presentation does not carry any right of publication. Neither this presentation nor any of its contents may be reproduced or used for any

other purpose without the prior written consent of the Infigen Entities.

IMPORTANT NOTICE

Nothing in this presentation should be construed as either an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy Infigen securities in the United States

or any other jurisdiction.

Securities may not be offered or sold in the United States or to, or for the account or benefit of, US persons (as such term is defined in

Regulation S under the US Securities Act of 1933) unless they are registered under the Securities Act or exempt from registration.

12

Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm Pioneering a Fairer Model for Regional Australia

Matthew Parton

• Global wind farm developer,

• Technology and research focussed: formed out of CSIRO,

• Headquarters and technical hub in Canberra,

• Over 7,000MW of developments internationally

We realised: community division is bad news for developers

• Delay in permitting or appeals,

• Continuing objections during construction/operation leading to delay,

• Hurt company image,

• Reduce investment potential, or higher return demanded

• Drain on development resources/morale,

• Broader industry impacts,

• Failure in social obligations.

We did research

Hall, Ashworth, Hylton. Exploring community acceptance of Rural wind farms in Australia: a snapshot, CSIRO 2012.

For neighbours

Building trust takes time

• Meet face-to-face

• Don’t argue in emails

• Follow through with promises (keep register)

• Listen/act on root cause

• Give community control

• Be transparent

I don’t want to live next to turbines

I oppose the project

I use my most

effective ammunition

The developer

tells me I’m wrong

I become more angry

Work on this

Not on this

Equity for Project Neighbours

Windlab Project

Neighbours

Coonooer Bridge

Wind Farm

Equity for Project Neighbours

Prepare

• Trust Principles

• Workshop distribution

• Legal advice on setup

Offer

• One-on-one meetings with offer

• Group presentation of plan

Discuss

• 18 Months to negotiate final offer

• Offer evolved over time

• Community had control of process

Finalise

• Legal documents drafted

• 100% uptake

But... No such thing as a free lunch!

Other things that helped • Smaller project size,

• Project team with rural background,

• Location with few lifestyle blocks,

• Lucky that the Coonooer Bridge community wanted to stay together

What was the Outcome?

• Unanimous approval at local council with no appeal,

• Minimal objection,

• 5 month assessment,

• No community divide,

• No negative press,

• Letters of Support from all stakeholders,

• Development team is energised,

• Strong community support helped in achieving a feed in tariff,

• Construction now underway!

Coonooer Bridge Wind Farm

Positive Impacts • Treated the root cause

• Equity was a good way of aligning Windlab’s interests with neighbours

Trust • Meet face-to-face

• Don’t argue in emails

• Follow through with promises (keep register)

• Listen/act on root cause

• Give community control

• Be transparent

Establishing the social licence to operate large scale solar facilities in Australia Clean Energy Summit 2015

Presented by Stuart Clark

Agenda

• Why social licence to operate?

• Objectives

• Social context of large scale facilities

• Five building blocks of SLO for large scale solar

Efficiency and reliability

Visual impacts

Environmental impacts

Economic and employment impacts

Health impacts

Why social licence to operate?

The lack of social licence is impacting the wind industry

Objectives

1. Understand general attitudes 2. Understand what drives acceptability 3. Produce a guide to establishing SLO

To identify the preconditions necessary for utility scale solar facilities to have a social licence to operate in Australia

Three phases of research

• 15 group discussions • 8 locations

• Melbourne (Vic) • Sydney (NSW) • Perth (WA) • Brisbane (Qld) • Darwin (NT) • Geraldton (WA) • Dubbo (NSW) • Broken Hill (NSW)

• Online survey • Nationally

representative sample • n= 1197

• Stakeholder interviews

• Stakeholders involved with five developing solar facilities

• Daly River (NT) • Greenough River (WA) • Kogan Creek (Qld) • Nyngan (NSW) • Broken Hill (NSW)

1 Qualitative Quantitative Review 2 3

Australians love solar energy…

Domestic solar frames our understanding…

… but knowledge of large scale solar is limited

Five building blocks underpin SLO for large scale solar

Reliability and efficiency

Questions of efficiency are top of mind for the public

Provide information about:

• Facility size

• Land use compared to energy output

• Efficiency compared to other energy sources

• Grid connections and where the energy will be used

• Use metrics that are readily understood by the public

“It comes back to how all the technologies they’ve got for solar power at the moment are not efficient – you don’t get much back for what you’ve got to do and what you’ve got to spend. I think it will always play a part, but I don’t think it will be a big part.”

Visual impacts

Stronger reputation than wind farms

“They’re probably not overly attractive, but better [than wind farms].”

“They’d probably be spread for miles, there’d be nothing particularly attractive about them, but they could probably be hidden.”

“I’ve not heard a single bad word about the solar plant. It doesn’t have some of the issues of a wind farm, for example. As far as everyone is concerned it just sits there”

But opinions are polarised and knowledge is limited

• 30% agree that large scale solar facilities have a negative visual impact on the local landscape

• Help the public understand what large scale solar looks like

• Use images and plans extensively

• Websites and print

• Information sessions

• Provide information and images about impact mitigation

Environmental impacts

• Regional communities tend to be less concerned about impacts than the wider community

• Provide information about previous land use and scale in the landscape

• Highlight the wider benefits (but be mindful of climate scepticism)

• Communicate clearly about local impact mitigation

• Address both short-term and longer-term impacts

Economic and employment impacts

“Obviously not everything can come from town, but there was a bit of an issue in that some of the things that could possibly have been got from town like meat supplies for the dining room, are being brought in from elsewhere… it’s a bit harder for some in the community to understand”

• Provide realistic information:

• Local job opportunities

• Timeframes

• Ensure opportunities are seen to flow through

• Manage concerns about non-local workers

• Understand what ‘local’ jobs mean to the community

Health impacts

Participant 1: “They [solar panels] could even cause cancer, you just don’t know.”

Participant 2: “Is there any research into that?”

• Highlight similarities to domestic and commercial solar

• Include messaging on basic health and safety

• Leverage perceptions of health benefits relative to non- renewables (e.g. lower air pollution)

http://arena.gov.au/project/utility-scale-solar-installations-social-license-to-operate-in-australia/
























Innovative technology solutions forsustainability

1

Solar Thermal Energy:Dispatchable Solar Power

Clean Energy Summit, SydneyJuly 2015

2

Abengoa at a glance

100,000 m3/day desalination plant (India)

Solar CSP

Biofuels

Cogeneration

Power transmission

Innovative solutions for sustainability

Energy

20 MW CSP Tower (Spain)

Environment

Water desalination, reuse and treatment

Abengoa Solar

Solar Thermal Electric Technologies

Source: IEA 2014 Solar Thermal Electric Roadmap

3Abengoa focuses on the two commercial STE technologies, trough and tower

Abengoa Solar

1.6 GW in operation, 500MW under construction worldwide

Europe

693 MW

Middle East & Africa

610 MW

North & South America

780 MW

4

Molten Salt Tower technology

R&D Pilot plant Commercial projects

Salt Receiver Test

� Molten-salt receiver (5MWth) at 565 ºC

� Operating over two years

� Learning and feedback for commercial design

� Technology background

� US DOE molten-salt development

� DOE Baseload CSP grant

� Leverage steam tower experience

� Chile awarded 110 MW project w/ 17.5 hours of storage (Atacama 1)

� Baseload power supply for mining operations

� Integrates low cost, efficient thermal energy storage

� Storage capacities of greater than 18 hours possible

� Uses efficient dry cooled steam cycle

� Allows full dispatchability of solar generation

Atacama I Plant Design

Salt Receiver Design

5

Molten Salt Tower

Decoupling energy collection & energy delivery

Collecting energy…

Delivering electricity…

565 °C290 °C

Hot Salt TankCold Salt Tank

Salt System(Thermal Energy Storage)

~Air-cooledCondenser

SteamTurbine

Steam System(Rankine Power Cycle)

Solar Field&

Tower

SteamGenerator

290 °C 565 °C565 °C290 °C 565 °C290 °C290 °C 565 °C290 °C 565 °C

6

The Challenge

Replicability

Relevant learnings for future STE project applications.

Plant Capacity

Minimize funding gap, but allow for future development and scale up.

Dispatchability

Integrated thermal energy storage (TES) system to allow the STE plant to generate

electricity when needed, and to provide firm capacity to the local transmission network.

Pathway to Cost Reduction

State-of-the-art technology offering the highest potential for cost reduction.

7

Perenjori Dispatchable Solar Thermal Power Plant

Australia

8

Perenjori Dispatchable Solar Thermal Power Plant

• 20 MW net capacity

• 7 hours molten salt storage

• State of the art molten salt technology, combined with potential CSIRO heliostat demonstration

• 94 GWh production per year (close to 15,000 households equivalent)

• Provides grid support to fringe of Western Power’s network

• Potential offtake by electricity retailer and iron ore miner

• Feasibility study funded by ARENA

Australia

Perenjori Video

9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml4tdmSwPew

Solar thermal electricity

Value of dispatchability and high firm capacity

10

Ability to move generation to times of high demand (premium pricing)

Provision of voltage and frequency support, spinning reserve and other ancillary services

Potential avoidance / deferral of network upgrades

Sou

rce

: A

be

ng

oa

Solar Thermal Electricity

International policies recognise value of dispatchable power

11

Morocco

South Africa

USA

• Premium of 117% over base tariff for peak generation

• Peak 5pm to 10pm (winter), 7pm to midnight (summer)

• Low premium reflects subsidised cost of oil

• Base tariff is therefore higher

• Premium of 270% over base tariff for peak generation

• Peak 4.30pm to 9.30pm

• High premium reflects actual cost cost gap between off-peak (coal, PV) and off-peak (OCGT) generation

• Base tariff is therefore lower

• State renewable obligations on utilities support premium for STE

• Some PPAs in California have time-based multipliers to contracted base tariff

• Recent program to purchase energy storage capacity from renewables

Solar thermal electricity

Benefits of solar thermal deployment

12

Investment

Direct Employment

Local Content & Supply Chain

Capacity Development

Local IP and Know-how

Major foreign direct investment in local and regional economy

During construction & operation phases

>50% of project cost is spent in skilled local manufacturing and construction services

Capabilities are developed in engineering, legal and financial services

Local research institutions e.g. CSIRO and leading Australian Universities

Solar thermal: the future

New roadmap vision for solar electricity: PV + STE

Source: IEA 2014 Solar Roadmap13


STE cost reduction and deployment

14

Source: IEA 2014 Solar Thermal Electric Roadmap


Complementary roles of PV and STE

PV STE

STE ?

� STE with low cost and efficient thermal energy storage

� Produces power when it is needed, even at night

� Solar can provide peaking or baseload power generation

So

urc

e:

IEA

20

14

ST

E R

oa

dm

ap

15

Abengoa Solar

Conclusions

Solar with integrated energy storage

Higher energy and capacity value

Allows solar to operate as peaking, load following or baseload generator

Continued deployment will ensure further cost reduction of STE

Global and local learnings both play a role

Policies should consider energy value, not just lowest cost

Capacity and ancillary service benefits

Employment creation, know how and technology development

STE and PV are complementary solar power generation technologies

Need a level playing field to value them appropriately

16

Thank You!

www.abengoasolar.com

Confidentiality notice“The entire information contained in this document is considered confidential or proprietary information of Abengoa Solar, S.A (the “Owner”). The disclosure or transmission of said information, in whole or in part, to any third party is expressly prohibited. Any person who has accessed the information contained herein shall maintain in strict confidence the confidential information contained in this document and he or she shall not copy, reproduce, reduce to writing, or disclose, in whole or in part, to third parties, the confidential information without the Owner’s prior written consent, nor use said information to his or her own benefit or for the benefit of a third party, and he or she bears all responsibility for its use, disclosure or transfer. Additionally, any person who has accessed this document acknowledges that the information contained herein has important value and that the Owner will suffer irreparable harm if the person who has accessed this information fails to comply with the confidentiality obligations set forth herein. Any person who infringes the obligations set forth herein shall indemnify the Owner from all damages and harm suffered as a consequence of the breach of confidentiality obligations established in this document.”

Copyright notice “All documents, drawings, e-mails, communication, graphics, industrial designs whether registered or unregistered, trade secrets, know-how, copyrights and neighboring rights, photographs and text appearing in this document are reserved and protected by copyright, patent law, trade secret law, industrial property law and intellectual property law. These industrial and intellectual property rights are owned exclusively by Abengoa Solar, S.A. (the “Owner”).Disclosure, distribution, redistribution, reproduction or commercial use of information contained in this document is prohibited without the express written permission from the Owner. The Owner does not permit infringement of any intellectual or industrial property that belongs to the Owner. All persons accessing this document are obligated to adhere to these terms and conditions and to abide by all obligations imposed by any intellectual or industrial property law or any applicable International Treaty.”

© Abengoa Solar, S.A. 2015. All rights reserved.

Moving Forward…. Australian Clean Energy Summit 2015

July 16, 2015 | Daniel Ruoss – Country Manager Module & Energy Business

www.canadiansolar.com

Safe Harbor Statement

2

This presentation has been prepared by Canadian Solar Inc. (the “Company”) solely to facilitate the understanding of the Company’s business model and

growth strategy. The information contained in this presentation has not been independently verified. No representation, warranty or undertaking,

express or implied, is made as to, and no reliance should be placed on, the fairness, accuracy, completeness or correctness of the information or the

opinions contained herein. None of the Company or any of its affiliates, advisers or representatives will be liable (in negligence or otherwise) for any loss

howsoever arising from any use of this presentation or its contents or otherwise arising in connection with the presentation.

This presentation contains forward-looking statements and management may make additional forward-looking statements in response to your questions.

Such written and oral disclosures are made pursuant to the Safe Harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These

forward looking statements include descriptions regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company or its officers with respect to its

future performance, consolidated results of operations and financial condition. These statements can be identified by the use of words such as “expects,”

“plans,” “will,” “estimates,” “projects,” or words of similar meaning. Such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and

involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from expectations implied by these forward-looking statements as a result of various

factors and assumptions. Although we believe our expectations expressed in such forward looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that

they will be realized, and therefore we refer you to a more detailed discussion of the risks and uncertainties contained in the Company’s annual report on

Form 20-F as well as other documents filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission. In addition, these forward looking statements are made as of the

current date, and the Company does not undertake to update forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances, unless otherwise

required by law.

Company Overview

3

Solar Power Plants Built and Connected In 2014, 3rd largest solar company globally by revenue and profits. Tier 1.

Acquired Recurrent Energy in March 2015.

Global pipeline >9GW.

In Australia;

4.8MW O&M care (DG)

100MW late-stage PV projects

>500MW early-stage pipeline

Solar PV – A Sunny Outlook

4

1% of global electricity generation today to >10% by 2030.

In 2014, RE capacity additions surpassed conventional energy for the first time.

Macro-Environment for Utility-Scale PV in Australia

5

BoP cost are declining rapidly; at least 25% cost reduction in PV panels in 3 years. Australia has some of the lowest PV panel pricing globally.

EPC prices are one of the highest in the world; too much fat and not enough competition. But, Australia is a global leader in lowest build-cost for residential and commercial PV system.

Capital-based incentive schemes don’t drive cost reduction. No funding adjustment/review if project on hold, although rapid BoS cost reduction over time.

Available PPAs (in the last 14-18 months) with price reset after 3-5 years. Merchant structure risk is driving up the cost of financing and Equity IRR.

Requires supporting mechanism such as ARENA, CEFC or State programs.

Showcase USA

6

Source: Austin Energy

DoE Loan Programs and ITC (Investment Tax Credits) were the fuel for a fast and successful drive since 2010; changes 2016.

Building a strong competition in EPC and Finance sector.

PPA rates of $38/MWh in 2016 ($59/MWh, ITC adjusted).

Cost of PPAs for utility-scale PV solar have decreased by more than 70% between 2008 and 2014.

Path To Cost Reduction in Australia – 2020

7

$160

$80

2015 2020

$150 $25

$20

$4 $20

$6 $75

$/MWh

Competitive and experienced finance sector.

Rapid technology innovation and cost reduction in manufacturing globally.

Competitive local D&C market environment with bulk purchasing power from global EPCs.

Finance EPC O&M Technology Capacity Factor

Moving Ahead – Global Perspective

8

Panel manufacturing cost sub-$40c/W by 2016.

N-type PV cell technology with fast efficiency improvements due to less impurities.

FiT markets phasing out grid-parity PPAs or merchant models. Investors adapt and up their risk appetite/profile.

The public wants Renewable Energy.

YieldCos beauties and beasts with massive appetite (portfolio approach) leads to more risk taking.

Moving Ahead – Local Perspective

9

Fringe-of-grid and addressing constraint networks with required generation (5-10MW) is a very low-hanging fruit (>100MW).

PPA bidding (reverse auction) or adder ($/MWh) performance-based structure with risk sharing by project sponsor.

Retiring of conventional generation and State initiatives (RE commitment).

LGCs security and recognition (multiplier) of Distribution Loss Factor on network.

Financial recognition if generation enables grid benefits (reduction of loss factors) regulatory change and payment for network support.

Update the Regulatory Framework with a focus on Wheeling Arrangements.

Conclusion

10

Good acceptance and support from the public, and efficient permitting process.

Fix first the network and distribution problems; generation at point of losses.

Not enough bankable off-takers and no long-term PPAs direct PPAs enable growth, i.e. Public Transport or Councils.

Increasing corporate social responsibility and sustainability targets of companies are important drivers.

New business models will emerge (game-changers); where’s Virgin Energy?

And yes, we’re ready … and yes, we can deliver and move forward very quickly.

Thank You! Australian Clean Energy Summit 2015

July 16, 2015 | Daniel Ruoss – Country Manager Module & Energy Business

www.canadiansolar.com

1

Utility Scale Solar and ARENA:

What is next? Ian Kay

CFO Australian Clean Energy Summit 16 July 2015

2

Where are we at with Utility Scale Solar in Australia? 132MW of installed capacity operational

109MW under construction

Pipeline…?

Nyngan Solar Plant

(Operational)

Broken Hill Solar Plant

(Construction)

Moree Solar Farm (Construction)

Royalla Solar Farm

(Operational)

20MW

53MW

56MW

102MW

>5MW Grid Connected

Greenough River Solar Farm (Operational)

10MW

3

Where is the pipeline?

2.7GW of PV generation with permits

2.4GW of early stages PV planning

180MW of CSP in the works

100MW

60MW

350MW

2000MW

+5000MW Pipeline in progress

50MW

50MW

60MW

30MW

15MW

10MW

13MW

20MW

1100MW

600MW

30MW 30MW

30MW

30MW

28MW

26MW

11MW 10MW

20MW

50MW

44MW

30MW

30MW


4

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Utility Scale Solar PV (Global Average) Onshore Wind (Global Average) New Build Coal Australia

How do we unlock the pipeline?

Or put another way, how do we bridge the gap to wind?

Utility scale solar PV (global) (1)

$87 (FRV, Brazil) (3) New build coal (Australia) (2)

Onshore wind (global) (1)

Current LCOE of Solar PV in

Australia (4)

LC

OE

(U

SD

$/M

Wh)

Source: (1) Large scale solar PV and onshore wind projections are global averages (inc US, EU, China and India regions) from BNEF, New Energy Outlook Global 2015 (2) Coal projections are from Australian Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics, 2012 Australian Energy Technology Assessment model – they do not include a carbon price. (3) Bloomberg New Energy Finance News, Solar energy makes landfall in Brazil at record-setting low price, 4 November 2014 (4) Assumes average exchange rate USD:AUD (0.8:1)

What about CSP?

5

How big is the CSP Bridge?

CSP has a different value proposition to solar PV in providing dispatchable power due to cheap storage

In the current over-supplied market, this value is hard to find. In other market circumstances might be worth as much as $50-60/MWh

Developers are targeting significantly lower costs by 2020

LC

OE

AU

D/M

Wh

2011

(IRENA)(1)

2015 (ARENA feasibility study)

$220-290

2018 – 2022

Industry targets (2)

$201

$120 - 180

Notes (1) Cost Analysis of CSP globally (IRENA) – June 2012 (USD/MWh) (2) Represents 10-40% cost reduction compared to the ARENA commissioned studies with range determined by technology,

location and scale

2014 (ARENA feasibility study)

$297

6

How have we been building that bridge? To date, ARENA has committed almost $700m to Solar PV and Thermal, from R&D focused rounds to large scale deployment

RenewEconomy

Australia’s Largest Solar Plant

Achieves Full Generation

Australia’s largest solar farm, the AGL Energy-owned 102MW Nyngan Solar Plant in western New South Wales is set to become fully operational in a matter of weeks after achieving the milestone of full generation

The Australian

RayGen reveals 'pioneering'

concentrated solar power tower

A unique concentrated solar photovoltaic (CSPV) power tower was unveiled in Newbridge, Victoria today, with the Australian Renewable Energy Agency saying the project would pave the way for the deployment of utility-scale CSPV power stations in Australia and overseas.

# $m % # $m % # $m %

R&D 94 99.2 14.2% 34 78.7 11.3% 128 177.8 25.5%

Demonstration 10 81.6 11.7% 4 80.2 11.5% 14 161.9 23.2%

Deployment 5 358.8 51.4% - - 0.0% 5 358.8 51.4%

Total 109 539.6 77.3% 38 158.9 22.7% 147 698.5 100.0%

TotalStage Solar PV Solar Thermal

7

Solar PV in Australia is approaching comfortably the $130/MWh (USD105) LCOE mark

How much further do we have to go?

Target range

Solar PV is ready to bridge

the gap

8

What? How much?

Program size ca. 200 MW (DC)

What? How much?


Individual project size 10 MW – 50MW (DC)

What? How much?



Budget $80m - $100m

What? How much?



Budget $80m - $100m

Launch Timing Consultation to late July, launch in Aug/Sep

What? How much?



Budget $80m - $100m


Financial Close and Construction

December 2016 target Financial Close December 2017 construction complete

What? How much?



Budget $80m - $100m




LCOE Metric $130/MWh as minimum benchmark

What? How much?



Budget $80m - $100m




LCOE Metric $130/MWh as minimum benchmark

Competitive metric ARENA grant per MWh (calculated over 20 year life)

What are we doing next?

ARENA has begun consultation for a large scale solar competitive round to continue push the cost curve is the right direction

For more information, go to:

arena.gov.au/large-scale-solar-pv

9

Find out more at arena.gov.au

ARENA at LinkedIn

@ARENA_aus on Twitter

Subscribe to updates: arena.gov.au/subscribe

Jeremy Rich

Australia Clean Energy Summit

16th July 2015

Over 3,300 GW of renewables growth thru 2030

Renewables 0.9 GW

Renewables (ex Hydro)


2,900


3,500 Hydro 1,000

Hydro 400

Hydro 1,400

Natural Gas 1,200

Natural Gas 400

Natural Gas 1,600

Coal, Oil, Nuclear 2,700

Coal, Oil, Nuclear, 600

Coal, Oil, Nuclear 3,300

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

TerraForm 2014 2014 Net Additions 2014-2030

2030

GW

Global Electricity Generation Capacity (GW), 2014-2030

5,500 GW

4,300 GW 9,800 GW


3,300

GW

Transition Toward Distributed Generation

Solar PV Market Segment Shift

• Toward Distributed Generation: Large Commercial Rooftops, Residential & Small Commercial (RSC), and Off-Grid

• Power where you use it

• Higher value segments 54 47

39 31

100

84

72 62

Residential,

Small

Commercial

(RSC)

Utility-Scale

Large

Commercial

Rooftops

Off-Grid

Source: 2012-2020 installations based on IHS, GTM and SunEdison

118 Annual Solar PV Installations (GW):

2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Huge Opportunity

Matching Supply to Demand Will be Worth

$800B in 2035

Solar Industry: Differentiated Strategy

Typical Solar Company

Module & EPC Technology Centric

Downstream is an Afterthought

Product Company

Strategic Stiffness

SunEdison

Technology Agnostic

Downstream is it

Energy Company

Strategic Agility

Power Industry: Diametrically Designed

Typical Power Company

Centralized Power, Significant

T&D Network, Non-Renewable

Monopoly, Huge CapEx,

Massive Investments at

Corporate Level

Heavy Reliance on Regulators &

Credit Agencies

SunEdison

Distributed, Small Increments,

Renewable Only

Massive Investments but Project

Based Fed into YieldCo's

Development Risk in SunEdison,

Low Yield in YieldCo's

Reinvention is critical

SunEdison – a global renewable energy leader We develop, build, finance and operate turnkey renewable power plants to provide our customers electricity at predictable

and competitive prices

World’s largest renewable energy development company

Top 3 Solar PV player globally

Recently acquired FirstWind a US based wind developer for 2.4 Bn USD

Current solar/wind generation pipeline of ~5.1 GW

Over 6,000+ employees in 25 global locations

Demonstrated track record with financial institutions

Fortune 1000 company - listed on NYSE (SUNE) with market cap ~ approx. $8.0 Bn

Successful IPO of Terraform YieldCo, current market cap $4.4 B and semiconductor business ($1 Bn mkt

Cap). established Emerging market YieldCo.

Over $5 Bn in financing experience worldwide.

Pioneer provider of solar systems and services

First to provide solar PPA in 2003 - commercial turnkey solar power plants

50:50 JV with Samsung for FBR Poly silicon manufacturing in Korea

Recently announced 5GW solar MoU with Govt. of Rajasthan and a JV with JIC Capital to develop 1GW solar

projects in China.

Committed to developing 15.2 GW of renewables in India over the next 7 years

SunEdison background

Founded in 1959 as MEMC; Launched MEMC I.P.O. on the NYSE in 1995. Acquired SunEdison in 2009

MEMC changed its name to SunEdison in 2013

8

SunEdison’s Rapid Global Growth Trajectory

MW Completed: MW Sold plus MW on balance sheet

Global MW Completions Global renewable market expected to show

19% CAGR through 2020

• SunEdison positioned to capture a

disproportionate share

SunEdison core markets growing 30% CAGR

2012 -2016

Commercial & Industrial: 39% CAGR 2012-

2016

• Focus on DG and international markets

will enable growth to 2017 and beyond

Continued future growth expected in project

completions

• 2015: > 2-2.4 GW

• 2016: > 3.0-3.5 GW 1Source: 2012-2017 installations based on IHS, GTM and SunEdison

2Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

9

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

2,200

2013 2014 2012 2015 2011 2010 2009

96.0%

MW range

SunEdison Australia growth will be driven by innovative financing offers

Innovative financing expected to drive volume and market share

Critical drivers of SunEdison Australia share growth:

Restructured and resourced to align with growth segments • Residential

• Small Commercial

• Large Commercial

Major investment in human capital • Workforce doubled to >100

• Business founders still driving but now supported by a strong industry experienced Executive

Launch and drive innovative financing offers • The SunEdison energy plan is unique and leverages low cost cross border

finance

• Australian credit licence laws and low cost funds a significant barrier to entry for many competitors

Leverage Australia’s leading solar web site and existing extensive dealer/partner network

• Building both strong internal/direct sales capability and dealer/partner sales channels initially from long term national wholesale customer base

• Retaining the leading Energy Matters web platform as a key driver of leads

Leverage global expertise and platforms • Step up in business/segment planning and reporting

• Developing strong sales portal

• Expertise in channel offer management and structured finance

11


Safe Harbor Statement

This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation

Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are statements

that do not represent historical facts and may be based on underlying assumptions. The company uses words

and phrases such as “improve,” “expect,” “grow,” “continue to,”

“growth,” expand,” “rapidly growing,” “will,” “plan,” “accelerating,” “drive,” “accretion,” “upside,” “guidance,”

“should,” “could,” “committed to,” “continuing to,” “roadmap,” “cost

reduction initiatives,” and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements in this presentation,

including forward-looking statements regarding: (a) total available

market opportunity and potential market share; (b) market access with support from Total S.A.; (c) panel

efficiency increasing; (d) cost/watt and BOS costs decreasing; (e)

DG business platform and 2015 goals, including market focus, product offering, financing methods and

capacity, market share; (f) power plant business platform and 2015

goals, including product share and offerings, go to market strategy; (g) energy solutions business platform and

2015 goals, including capital, cash flow and customer base; (h)

product differentiation, including reliability, performance, efficiency and levelized cost of energy; (i) becoming a

Fortune 500 company; (j) project construction milestones for

utility scale projects; (k) projected gross margins and revenue through 2016; (m) growth in MW deployed and

customer base; (n) trends towards financed smaller, rooftop

systems; (o) backlog, bookings and pipeline; (p) improving margin profile; (q) average selling prices; (r) value

of rebates and other incentives; (s) non-GAAP and non-GAAP

guidance for the second fiscal quarter and full fiscal year 2013, including revenue, gross margin, earnings/loss

per share, MW recognized, capital expenditures, MW

deployed, operating expenses, OIE, tax rate, and weighted average shares; (t) reducing operational

expenses, (u) generating free cash flow, including lease financings, (v)

NPV of recent and planned business activities relative to traditional adjusted EBITDA valuation; and (w)

investing in technology roadmap and manufacturing reduction

initiatives. Such forward-looking statements are based on information available to the company as of the date

of this release and involve a number of risks and uncertainties,

some beyond the company's control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated

by these forward-looking statements, including risks and

uncertainties such as: (i) increasing supply and competition in the industry and lower average selling prices,

impact on revenues, gross margins, and any revaluation of

inventory as a result of decreasing ASP or reduced demand; (ii) the impact of regulatory changes and the

continuation of governmental and related economic incentives

promoting the use of solar power, and the impact of such changes on our revenues, financial results, and any

potential impairments or write off to our intangible assets,

project assets and long-lived assets; (iii) company's success in completing the design, construction and

maintenance of California Valley Solar Ranch and Antelope Valley

Solar Ranch, and any early termination in the agreements between NRG or MidAmerican and SunPower for

these projects, and any liquidated damages that are payable

under these agreements; (iv) the company's ability to meet its cost reduction plans and reduce its operating

expenses; (v) the company's ability to obtain and maintain an

adequate supply of raw materials, components, and solar panels, as well as the price it pays for such items,

third parties' willingness to renegotiate or cancel above market

contracts, and the resolution of any disputes, arbitration or litigation relating to suppliers; (vi) general business

and economic conditions, including seasonality of the solar

industry and growth trends in the solar industry; (vii) the company's ability to obtain additional financing for its

residential lease program and its ability to grow the residential

lease program in North America and globally; (viii) construction difficulties or potential delays, including

obtaining land use rights, permits, license, other governmental

approvals, and transmission access and upgrades, and any litigation relating thereto; (ix) timeline for revenue

recognition and impact on the company's operating results; (x)

the significant investment required to construct power plants and the company's ability to sell or otherwise

monetize power plants; (xi) fluctuations in the company's operating

results and its unpredictability; (xii) the availability of financing arrangements for the company's projects and

the company's customers; (xiii) potential difficulties associated

with operating the joint venture with AU Optronics; (xiv) success in achieving cost reduction, and the

company's ability to remain competitive in its product offering, obtain

premium pricing while continuing to reduce costs and achieve lower targeted cost per watt; (xv) the

company's liquidity, substantial indebtedness, and its ability to obtain

additional financing; (xvi) manufacturing difficulties that could arise;(xvii) the company's ability to achieve the

expected benefits from its relationship with Total S.A.; (xviii) the

success of the company's ongoing research and development efforts and the acceptance of the company's

new products and services; (xix) the company's ability to protect

its intellectual property; (xx) the company's exposure to foreign exchange, credit and interest rate risk; (xxi)

the joint venture in China being able to obtain all required

government approvals and the company’s ability to successfully operate the joint venture in China; (xxii) being

able to manage market conditions in Europe and reach

profitability in Europe; (xxiii) the accuracy of assumptions and compliance with treasury cash grant and IRS

guidance, and the timing and amount of cash grant and

investment tax credit received, including the impact of sequestration; (xxiv) possible consolidation of the joint

venture AUO SunPower; and (xxv) other risks described in the

company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2012, the company’s Quarterly

Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2013, and

other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These forward-looking statements should not be

relied upon as representing the company's views as of any

subsequent date, and the company is under no obligation to, and expressly disclaims any responsibility to,

update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result

of new information, future events or otherwise

This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are statements that do not represent historical facts and may be based on underlying assumptions. The company uses words and phrases such as “improve,” “expect,” “grow,” “continue to,” “growth,” expand,” “rapidly growing,” “will,” “plan,” “accelerating,” “drive,” “accretion,” “upside,” “guidance,” “should,” “could,” “committed to,” “continuing to,” “roadmap,” “cost reduction initiatives,” and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements in this presentation, including forward-looking statements regarding: (a) total available market opportunity and potential market share; (b) market access with support from Total S.A.; (c) panel efficiency increasing; (d) cost/watt and BOS costs decreasing; (e) DG business platform and 2015 goals, including market focus, product offering, financing methods and capacity, market share; (f) power plant business platform and 2015 goals, including product share and offerings, go to market strategy; (g) energy solutions business platform and 2015 goals, including capital, cash flow and customer base; (h) product differentiation, including reliability, performance, efficiency and levelized cost of energy; (i) becoming a Fortune 500 company; (j) project construction milestones for utility scale projects; (k) projected gross margins and revenue through 2016; (m) growth in MW deployed and customer base; (n) trends towards financed smaller, rooftop systems; (o) backlog, bookings and pipeline; (p) improving margin profile; (q) average selling prices; (r) value of rebates and other incentives; (s) non-GAAP and non-GAAP guidance for the second fiscal quarter and full fiscal year 2013, including revenue, gross margin, earnings/loss per share, MW recognized, capital expenditures, MW deployed, operating expenses, OIE, tax rate, and weighted average shares; (t) reducing operational expenses, (u) generating free cash flow, including lease financings, (v) NPV of recent and planned business activities relative to traditional adjusted EBITDA valuation; and (w) investing in technology roadmap and manufacturing reduction initiatives. Such forward-looking statements are based on information available to the company as of the date of this release and involve a number of risks and uncertainties, some beyond the company's control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by these forward-looking statements, including risks and uncertainties such as: (i) increasing supply and competition in the industry and lower average selling prices, impact on revenues, gross margins, and any revaluation of inventory as a result of decreasing ASP or reduced demand; (ii) the impact of regulatory changes and the continuation of governmental and related economic incentives promoting the use of solar power, and the impact of such changes on our revenues, financial results, and any potential impairments or write off to our intangible assets, project assets and long-lived assets; (iii) company's success in completing the design, construction and maintenance of California Valley Solar Ranch and Antelope Valley Solar Ranch, and any early termination in the agreements between NRG or MidAmerican and SunPower for these projects, and any liquidated damages that are payable under these agreements; (iv) the company's ability to meet its cost reduction plans and reduce its operating expenses; (v) the company's ability to obtain and maintain an adequate supply of raw materials, components, and solar panels, as well as the price it pays for such items, third parties' willingness to renegotiate or cancel above market contracts, and the resolution of any disputes, arbitration or litigation relating to suppliers; (vi) general business and economic conditions, including seasonality of the solar industry and growth trends in the solar industry; (vii) the company's ability to obtain additional financing for its residential lease program and its ability to grow the residential lease program in North America and globally; (viii) construction difficulties or potential delays, including obtaining land use rights, permits, license, other governmental approvals, and transmission access and upgrades, and any litigation relating thereto; (ix) timeline for revenue recognition and impact on the company's operating results; (x) the significant investment required to construct power plants and the company's ability to sell or otherwise monetize power plants; (xi) fluctuations in the company's operating results and its unpredictability; (xii) the availability of financing arrangements for the company's projects and the company's customers; (xiii) potential difficulties associated with operating the joint venture with AU Optronics; (xiv) success in achieving cost reduction, and the company's ability to remain competitive in its product offering, obtain premium pricing while continuing to reduce costs and achieve lower targeted cost per watt; (xv) the company's liquidity, substantial indebtedness, and its ability to obtain additional financing; (xvi) manufacturing difficulties that could arise;(xvii) the company's ability to achieve the expected benefits from its relationship with Total S.A.; (xviii) the success of the company's ongoing research and development efforts and the acceptance of the company's new products and services; (xix) the company's ability to protect its intellectual property; (xx) the company's exposure to foreign exchange, credit and interest rate risk; (xxi) the joint venture in China being able to obtain all required government approvals and the company’s ability to successfully operate the joint venture in China; (xxii) being able to manage market conditions in Europe and reach profitability in Europe; (xxiii) the accuracy of assumptions and compliance with treasury cash grant and IRS guidance, and the timing and amount of cash grant and investment tax credit received, including the impact of sequestration; (xxiv) possible consolidation of the joint venture AUO SunPower; and (xxv) other risks described in the company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2012, the company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2013, and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing the company's views as of any subsequent date, and the company is under no obligation to, and expressly disclaims any responsibility to, update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise


Highest efficiency panels1 Highest reliability panels3

1 Highest of over 3,200 silicon solar panels, Photon Module Survey, Feb 2014.; Green, M. A., et. al. “Solar Cell Efficiency Tables (version 43),” Progress in Photovoltaics, 2014.

2 Most energy per rated watt out of 151 panels tested. Photon International, Feb 2013. 3 #1 rank in "PV Module Durability Initiative Public Report," Fraunhofer ISE, Feb 2013. Five out of the top 8 largest manufacturers were tested. Campeau, Z. et al. "SunPower Module Degradation Rate," SunPower white paper, Feb 2013. See www.sunpowercorp.com/facts for details.” 4 Source: 2014 Fortune 500 Global Ranking

• World record for highest efficiency silicon

solar panel1

• >5.8 GW solar PV deployed

• Diversified portfolio: roofs to power plants, on-

grid and off-grid applications

• Publicly listed on NASDAQ (SPWR)

• 2014 revenue: $2.62B

• 1.3 GWp total production capacity end 2014

• 7,000+ employees

• We only do solar

• More than 500 patents

• Majority owned by Total Group (#11 Fortune

500)4

Highest energy production2

http://www.sunpowercorp.com/facts


1.Market Problem/Opportunity

2.Customer Acquisition

3.System Design

4.Installation


Market Problem and Opportunity – Soft Costs Now Dominate

30%

7%

6%

9%

48%

US Commercial Rooftop System Cost Breakdown, 2014

Soft Costs 48%

Modules 30%

Inverters 7%

Electrical BOS 6%

Mechanical BOS 6% Source: GTM Research

Residential PV Pricing US, Germany and Australia

Source: Rocky Mountain institute “Lessons From Australia 2014”

Customer Acquisition


Precision Prospecting, Overcoming network constraints

• Geospatial Mapping Tools

– Solar resource

– Network constraints

– Existing Infrastructure/Planned investment

– IRENA Global Atlas

– Western Power NCMT

– DANCE Mapping

• SunWiz Commercial Solar Database

• CEC FPDI and CTP Standardisation Mid Scale IES

Mapping Tools, Knowledge Bases and Databases

Sources: 1 DANCE Map

2 IRENA Global Atlas 3 Western power NCMT

4 SunWiz Solar Database


Focused Prospecting -> Help Customer to Optimise Value Proposition-> System Delivery

Integrative CRM

Solar Potential by Available Roof and Electricity Consumption

Spectrum

Project timelines provide insight for managing customer expectations

Project Management • Order management

• Resource and materials scheduling

• Inventory and account management

• “As-installed” performance verification

Problems easy to spot and remedy

System Design


Integrative CRM -> System Design Standardised Preloaded Configurations - Design Completed by non Technical Sales Staff

Sample Customer

Sources: Clenergy PV eZ Design

PVSyst


Simplified Design – Lean Procurement – Installation Savings

• 4 corner arrays only

– Avoid bespoke string configuration, simpler estimating

– Spatial and electrical replication from module to combiner box

– High efficiency avoids need to deploy on whole roof/shaded areas

– Preassembly on racking and DC conductors = labour savings

• AC Harness preassembly

– More resource during site survey to map run but much cheaper installation

• On roof inverter/PV Switchboard Installation

– IP rated ruggedized inverters

– Preassembled AC “whips”

Design Standardisation


Innovation: Module Efficiency Matters Looks better, saves more, lasts longer

• 30 all-black solar panels

• 9.8 kW system

Standard Efficiency

• 40 bluish solar panels

• 9.6 kW system

Looks better, saves more, lasts longer

© 2014 Google

Installation


Installation Cost Reduction Opportunities

• Pre Installation

– More planning upfront, specialized crews, well stocked vans, lean approach/eliminate waste

• Racking/Module Prep and Install

– Use jigs/gauges, use module conveyors, integrative racking, 4 corner arrays, poka yoke/combine parts

• Electrical On Roof

– Standardised array BOMs, prefabricated harnesses/conduit, ACPV/Micro Inverters

• Electrical Off Roof

– Prefabricated harnesses/conduit

• Non production

– 2 installs per day (resi), resource levelling/scheduling

Image courtesy of Geda GmbH


A Glimpse of the Future?

Thank You

Let’s change the way our world is powered.

| © 2015 SunPower Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

SUNPOWER and the SUNPOWER logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of SunPower Corporation in Australia, the U.S., and other countries as well.

1

> New Business Models with Solar

> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

New business models with Solar

Marc England EGM New Energy

2


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

Evolving energy industry There are major shifts transforming our industry.

Aggregated Optimised Connected Centralised

Simple devices

Connected, Smart devices

Premise integration

1. Carbon reduction imperative

2. Falling cost of distributed energy

3. Proliferation of connectivity & data

4. Electrification of homes & vehicles

5. Increasing consumer expectations and engagement

System-level integration

New players

New business models

Innovative service models

New value pools

3


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

4


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

An Example of Harnessing Insight Not all storage is created equal

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Sample site

Provider A

Provider B

Storage driven savings for NSW households with 5 kW of solar

Savings vary

greatly

5


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

Smart Ways to Pay Increasing options for customers

6


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

Smart Ways to Pay – The Solar PPA Increasing options for customers

Solar Installation

End of Smart Plan Agreement

Energ

y B

ill to

day

Estimated Bill for Grid Energy

Potential Savings

Years

$

7


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

Smart Ways to Pay – The Solar PPA Increasing options for customers

We install the system,

monitor it, and ensure

everything is running as

efficiently as possible.

The payment options are

7, 10, 12 or 15 years. At

the end of the Plan, AGL

can transfer the solar

system to you as set out

in the solar Smart Plan.

You don’t need to worry

about warranties or

maintenance for the

duration of your solar

Smart Plan – we take

care of it all.

By turning your roof into

a power generator you

can pay for what you

produce or what you

consume.

8


> CEC Presentation

> 16 July 2015

Maximising AGL’s strengths AGL’s position will help us get ahead in new areas.

Customer knowledge

Scale

Strong balance sheet Strong brand

Existing relationships

Launched flexible, low cost solar

finance products

>80% of customers would choose

incumbent utility

Harnessing insights from

3.7 million customer accounts

Enabled lower metering costs Load

Behind The Meter (BHTM)

Large-Scale PV

Market Overview & Project Examples Market Forecast Financials Size of Market

Toyota Tsusho, Dandenong South

IKEA projects

Superpop Group, Lyndhurst Burder Industries, Wangaratta The GPT Group, Rouse Hill

2014 Market Overview

In 2014 we saw the BTM Large-Scale (>100kW & <1MW) PV sector grow by ~ 18MW.

Large-Scale Behind The Meter PV

This Included:

• IKEA Tempe

• IKEA Richmond

• IKEA Logan

• IKEA Springvale

• IKEA Rhodes

• Toyota Tsusho (505kWp)

• Burder Industries (355kWp)

• MSD Animal Health (250kWp)

• Bassong Engineering (180kWp)

• University of Wollongong (150kWp)

• Peter Lehmann Wines (130kWp)

} Over 3.8MWp


Market Forecast

Where is the Large-Scale BTM PV sector heading?



17,931

645,908

151,286

57,000

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

Commercial BHTM Residential Sub 100kW Utility Scale

kWp

2014 Capacity Breakdown

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

kWp

Forecast LGC Market Capacity (kWp)

Yearly Capacity Cumulative Capacity

LGCs/Year: 1,084 (SunWiz); 33,000 GWh (LRET target); (3%). BNEF utility scale: 2.25 GW; SunWiz BHTM: 0.8GW additional (36%). *BHTM will continue to be deployed from 2020 to 2030, affecting spot prices.

Return On Investment For Large-Scale PV

What Do These Projects Return?



100kW system prices show economies of scale, and are getting cheaper. PV offsets industrial pricing of 10-15c/kWh, generating IRRs exceeding 14.

Project Financials

How much are these projects worth?



250kW PV in Sydney costing $1.75/W ex GST ($437k). Offsetting 14c/kWh electricity… Without LGCs: $60k/year revenue, IRR of 14.3% Producing 10 MWh/day (3650 LGCs/year) With $50 LGCs = $80k/year revenue, IRR of 18% (payback 5.7years) Wind: 10-12% IRR 10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

$0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60

BTM PV IRR vs LGC price

How many LGCs/year can BTM PV supply?


Consider the additional contribution of Utility Scale & Remote PV

Proportion proceeding

10 - 30kW

30-100kW

100-1000kW

1MW+ Total

10% 95% 4% 0% 0% 99%

10% 90% 8% 2% 0% 100% 25% 40% 50% 9% 1% 100% 25% 35% 35% 20% 10% 100%

25% 20% 35% 30% 15% 100% 25% 5% 30% 40% 25% 100%

Sites proceeding

MW MW LRET GWh LRET

SunWiz estimate 138,549 4,377 1,364 2,046

Upper level estimate

404,520 11,364 2,645 3,967

2,046

3,967

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

GW

h

LRET Market Size Estimates

SunWiz Estimate Upper Level Estimate


Thank You

SunWiz offer a range of solar intelligence solutions for businesses including our software

(PVsell), commercial market strategies and insightful, strategic and interactive analytics


RETelligence (LGC Market)

ClearView (STC Market)

SunWiz Insights (Solar Market)

www.SunWiz.com.au


Improving energy

services in the Pacific

Tendai Gregan

Energy Specialist, The World Bank


Hilton Hotel, Sydney, 16 July 2015

Overview

1

• The World Bank Group

• Pacific Energy Program

• Strategic Priorities

• Examples of projects

• Business Opportunities

• PNG, Pacific Islands, Indonesia, Vietnam

The World Bank Group

The World Bank includes: the International Bank for

Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the

International Development Association (IDA).

Three other institutions are closely associated with the

World Bank: the International Finance Corporation (IFC) the

Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), and the

International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

(ICSID).

All five together make up the World Bank Group.

3

Pacific Energy Program The Pacific Energy Program is active in 8 Island nations – FSM, PNG, Kiribati, Samoa,

Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu

In FY15 - 15 active projects* and a total investment lending of US$104M

*Projects = 13 Investment Lending project and 2 AAA

Evolution of Pacific Energy Portfolio

4.00

33.49 33.49

5.90

34.02

3.35

30.52 22.19

38.24 31.40

77.19

13.80 4.80

90.52

138.10

Ap

pro

ved

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Ap

pro

ved

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Ap

pro

ved

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Ap

pro

ved

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Ap

pro

ved

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Appro

ved

Pip

elin

e

Len

din

g P

roje

cts

Pip

elin

e

FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16

Total Commitments (USD mill)

Total commitments have increased by 35% - from US$ 37.5m in FY09 to

US$104.3m in FY15

Strategic Priorities of Pacific Energy

Program 1. Strengthening energy planning and enabling policy, institutional

and regulatory frameworks, and capacity building; and

2. Utilities’ reform: improved performance and sustainability

These areas helped underpin others objectives:

3. Increasing access to affordable, reliable and sustainable electricity

services; and

4. Facilitating least-cost power supply and energy efficiency, including

through smart Public-Private Partnerships.

Current Energy Projects

10.50

28.45 27.42

24.98

Energy Access Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy TechnicalAssistance

Total commitments (USD mill)

Total

Examples of current projects…

Planning, enabling policy, institutional and regulatory

frameworks, and capacity building:

• Tonga and Vanuatu National Energy Roadmaps

• FSM States Energy Master Plans

• Strengthening capacity of Pacific Power Association in Renewable

Energy and resource mapping

• Development of National Electrification Rollout Plan in PNG,

TPAC/GC, Renewable Energy resource mapping

Examples of current projects…(2)

Utility reform:

• Solomon Islands – Solomon Islands Electricity Authority

• Kiribati Reform – Public Utilities Board

• FSM Utilities Reform

CHUUK PUBLIC UTILITY

CORPORATION

Kosrae Utilities Authority

(KUA)


Access to affordable, reliable and sustainable

electricity services:

Vanuatu Increase Electricity Access Project

Vanuatu Rural Electrification Project


Facilitating least cost power supply and energy

efficiency, including through smart PPPs.

Tina River hydro and Loss reduction in Solomon Islands

Naoro Brown hydro in PNG

Kiribati solar PV

Tuvalu Renewable Energy/Energy Efficiency

Gensets in FSM

11

In preparation/Pipeline Activities FY15-FY17 Increasing Access Energy Planning, enabling

policy, institutional &

regulatory support

Increasing Renewable

Energy

Utilities

Performance/Capa

city/Increasing

Efficiency

Fiji Electricity / Utilities

Access Project

(FY16)

Geothermal Road Map

(FY16)

Kiribati Public Utilities Board

Reform

(FY16)

Papua

New

Guinea

Development of

Transmission grid

(FY16-17)

80MW Naoro Brown

Hydropower

(FY17)

Solomon

Islands

Electricity Access

Expansion Project

(FY15)

Tina River Hydropower

(20MW, FY16)

Vanuatu Vanuatu Rural

Electrification Stage 2

(FY16)

National Energy Road Map

Mid Term Review

(FY16)

Regional Sustainable Energy Industry

Development

(FY15)

12

Solar opportunities

• Hybrid solar-diesel systems for stand-alone mini-grids in

remote areas.

• Grid connected solar (e.g. Kiribati, Tonga, Solomon Islands,

Fiji, RMI, etc.)

• ADB, UAE, New Zealand, World Bank, etc.

• Solar integration studies and follow on integration with

grids.

• O&M services, training, parts, etc. -- to local utilities and

energy service companies.

• Mini-grids, franchises, business partnerships.

13

Business Opportunities

Area Activities Countries

Resource assessments Hydro, geothermal, solar,

wind

PNG, Pacific Islands,

Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar

Least cost power system

planning studies

National electrification roll-out

plans.

PNG, Pacific Islands,

Indonesia, Myanmar

Engineering consultancy

services

Pre-feasibility, feasibility,

optimization, design, etc.

East Asia & Pacific

South Asia

Supply of electrical and

mechanical equipment

Switchgear, transformers,

SCADA, etc.

PNG, Pacific Islands

Investments in

generation

Hydropower, solar, etc.

PNG, Pacific Islands; Vietnam

(planned partial divestitures);

Indonesia (IPPs & rural

electrification.

14

Business Opportunities

Area Activities Countries

Hybrid systems Renewables + diesel generation

for remote locations.

Mini-grids.

Pacific Islands, PNG,

Indonesia

Geothermal Exploration, Feasibility Studies,

Production

Vanuatu, Indonesia,

Philippines

Energy efficiency Supply and demand side Pacific Islands, PNG,

Indonesia, Vietnam

Financing & risk

management

Energy infrastructure – power

generation, LNG terminals, gas

pipelines.

IPPs, privatizations, partial

divestitures.

New Vietnam Wholesale

Electricity Market (VWEM)

Vietnam, Indonesia.

PNG and Pacific Islands.

15

Business Opportunities: Finding them

Title of Presentation 16

• World Bank sponsored projects require competitive tendering for most

activities and these are advertised on UN Development Business, dgMarket,

and the World Bank’s eConsultant portal. Registration required.

• eConsultant, https://wbgeconsult2.worldbank.org/ Register interest and

receive notification of opportunities around the globe.

• dgMarket, http://www.dgmarket.com/

• UN Development Business, https://www.devbusiness.com

• The official United Nations website for consulting, contracting and export

opportunities worldwide.

• Everyday UNDB receives, processes and publishes dozens of procurement notices

and contract awards coming in from our partners at the World Bank, the Inter-

American Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for

Reconstruction and Development, the African Development Bank, the Islamic

Development Bank, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, national governments, the

United Nations’ agencies and more.

• World Bank projects & operations: www.worldbank.org/projects

https://wbgeconsult2.worldbank.org/

https://wbgeconsult2.worldbank.org/

http://www.dgmarket.com/

http://www.dgmarket.com/

https://www.devbusiness.com/



http://www.worldbank.org/projects

World Bank Group

Level 19, 14 Martin Place

Sydney NSW 2000

AUSTRALIA

www.worldbankgroup.org

Thank you

Clean Energy Council (CEC) Annual Conference 2015 Compiled Presentations

Environment

Transcript of Clean Energy Council (CEC) Annual Conference 2015 Compiled Presentations