Opportunities in the us cleantech market
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Opportunities in the us cleantech market

on

  • 1,515 views

Market opportunities for Danish cleantech companies in the American market

Market opportunities for Danish cleantech companies in the American market

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,515
Views on SlideShare
1,501
Embed Views
14

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
27
Comments
0

1 Embed 14

http://www.slideshare.net 14

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Opportunities in the us cleantech market Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Welcome to "After Work Meeting": The US Cleantech Market - Emerging Trends and Opportunities for Danish Companies May 25th, 2010
  • 2. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Welcome Nicolai Sederberg Rottbøll Head of Secretariat Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster
  • 3. OPPORTUNITIES IN THE US CLEANTECH MARKET 25 MAY 2010 26.05.2010 CPHCLEANTECH.COM INFO@CPHCLEANTECH.COM T: +45 3322 0222
  • 4. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Opportunity Spotting for Danish Companies in the American Cleantech Market Giles Jackson, PhD., Associate Professor, Byrd School of Business
  • 5. Giles Jackson
  • 6. “Summing up, it is clear the future holds great opportunities. It also holds pitfalls. The trick will be to avoid the pitfalls, seize the opportunities -- and get back home by six o'clock” Woody Allen
  • 7. “WORK IN PROGRESS”
  • 8. 2010 McKinsey Study: 100% renewables is feasible by 2050. Climate Mitigation Initiative. http://cmi.princeton.edu/wedges/
  • 9. Q: How do we grow a slither into a wedge? A: “New Industrial Revolution” (Dr. Steven Chu)  2010 EIA study: US energy supply = 48.3% coal, 20.5% natural gas, 1.2% petrol fired plants, 20.1 nuclear, 6.1% hydro, 3.7% renewables. Av. price 9.35c/kWh.  Utility industry spent 0.17% of sales on R&D 2003-2006. DOE R&D down from $6 billion 1978 to $1.8 billion 2004.  2009 Federal budget allocated just 8.2% of $147 billion R&D budget to all energy, general science, natural resources, environmental research and green buildings.  The bad news: Fossil fuel companies outspent renewables companies by 7-to-1 in lobbying services, Q1 2010 (Center for Responsive Politics).  The good news:  States are forging ahead regardless.  Green stimulus funds (US will spend 18% of $248 billion 2010).
  • 10. INTRODUCED MAY 11 Goal: reduce global warming pollution to 95.25 % of 2005 levels by 2013, 83 % of 2005 levels by 2020, 58 percent of 2005 levels by 2030, and 17 % of 2005 levels by 2050. APA is ―crucial to the success of American entrepreneurship‖ - John Doerr, venture capitalist
  • 11. FOSSIL FUELS CLEANTECH APA NUCLEAR ENERGY RENEWABLE ENERGY  $50bn in loan  Clean Energy Technology Fund; $5bn clean energy manufacturing tax credit. guarantees, but storage  But no Renewable Electricity Standard. issue unresolved. Rash of lawsuits filed by VEHICLES & TRANSPORTATION states.  National Transportation Low Emissions Energy Plan; Clean Vehicle Technology Fund; tax incentives for fleet conversion; OFFSHORE OIL/GAS mandatory targets/standards for states  States can veto drilling and metro areas (boosting urban transit). up to 75 miles from shore. BIOFUELS  National Academies of Sciences to study how different sources of biomass can COAL (CARBON CAPTURE) contribute to energy independence,  80% projected increase protect the environment and reduce global in cost of energy. Duke warming pollution. Energy’s 612MW plant CAP & TRADE (ready in 2012) will cost  Cap and trade system with introductory $2.88 billion. carbon price of $12, increasing 3%  Dr. Chu: goal is to reduce annually. Ceiling set at $25, increasing 5 % to 20-25% over current over inflation annually. Utilities start in 2013 and other industries 2016. cost within 10 years. Today: no level carbon playing field.
  • 12.  The strategy to appease powerful special interests and lure Republicans failed. Idea of raising price of energy unpopular given fragile recovery … add to that Climategate and diminished credibility of the IPCC. … with more Republicans expected in November. “It goes without saying that a cap and trade law – or, better, an outright carbon tax – is needed, and eventually it will happen. After healthcare, nobody should say the chances of reform in 2010 are nil, but the odds look long.” Financial Times, May 17
  • 13. TRENDS & OPPORTUNITIES
  • 14.  57% of US energy is wasted in production, distribution and consumption. A top priority is doing more with less. With guidance from the CCC, our study* profiled 45 US firms in four areas:  E-Vehicles – Pike Research projecting > 600,000 vehicles next 5 years. 12 contenders at the brink of commercialization. Chevy Volt, Coda Automotive (fall 2012), Tesla S Sedan (IPO), Nissan Leaf, etc.  Biofuels and materials – DOE wants a commodity. Advanced biofuels need investment. Biofuels could supply 58% of US fuel needs (2005 US government study). Three phases: (I) waste fuels 2010, (II) Jatropha 2014, (III) algae based fuels 2016 (Pike Research).  Smart grid – like the pre-Internet (lack of standards). Needs a platform, power storage to level the load, and high-voltage transmission lines. Huge shortage of manpower is projected. DOE has given $3.4 billion for 100 grid projects, which will rise to $8.1 billion (earth2tech.com).  Green homes & smart buildings – buildings are responsible for 2/5 of carbon. Innovation driven by building code reform, tax incentives and rebates (Energy Star, Home Star & soon Building Star), tightened standards for appliances, aging housing stock and better information, e.g. energy information on appliance labels. *Co-authored with Morten King-Grubert & Lasse Becker, with student assistance
  • 15.  In 2009, 1125 patents filed with US Patent & Trademark Office. Biomass/biofuel up 260%; solar 60%; fuel cells and hybrid/EVs 20%; wind and geothermal flat; hydro/tidal in decline (Clean Energy Patent Growth Index).  In 2009 USPTO launched the fast-track program to speed up the patent process for 3,000 already-filed patents.  Eligible patents required to focus on one of four areas: environmental quality, renewable energy development, energy conservation or greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
  • 16.  Total clean energy investment reached $27.3 billion in Q1, down from $31.6 billion Q4 ‘09, but more than the $20.8 billion in Q1 ’09 (Bloomberg).  Venture investment showed strongest Q1 of all time with $1.9 billion invested, up 83 % from Q1 ‘09.  Corporate direct investment up 140 % from Q4. Utility investments in renewable power and smart grid.  Capital scarce and costly; large scale debt financing limited to proven technologies, leaving start-ups dependent on more costly equity financing.  Early stage ventures increasingly seeking corporate partnerships to escape Valley of Death. E.g. biofuels.  Energy efficiency has become a magnet (faster and more reliable returns), boosted by the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act of 2010 (invests $6 billion over two years).
  • 17. FEDERAL
  • 18.  Qualified firms receive 30% cash grant from US Treasury in lieu of Production Tax Credit (PTC) or Investment Tax Credit (ITC). Reduces dependence on scarce tax equity.  $2.6 billion was disbursed as of March 1 2010, creating 4250MW of new renewables capacity:  86% ($2.2 billion) went to 40 large wind projects (almost 3900MW; 20% of total installed capacity in 2009)  6% went to 10 geothermal projects (137MW)  4.5% went to 302 solar projects (61MW)  2.8% went to 8 biomass projects (130MW)  0.5% went to 4 landfill gas projects (20.5MW)  0.1% went to 2 fuel cell projects (1.3MW)  $883,009 went to 20 small wind projects (0.7MW)  2010 DOE/LBNL report deemed program a success.
  • 19.  $400 million earmarked for high-risk “moonshot” technologies (2009-2011).  Round I: $51 million went to 37 firms (out of 3600). Winning teams are required to share at least 10 percent of the project costs.  Round II: $106 million in grants announced April 30. $34.6 million allocated to 10 projects developing energy storage tech for plug-in vehicles. In addition, 13 projects working on electrofuels (e.g. converting hydrogen and CO2 into motor fuel) got $41.2 million.  Round III: Innovative Materials and Processes for Advanced Carbon Capture Technology (IMPACCT), Batteries for Electrical Energy Storage in Transportation (BEEST), Innovations in Electrofuels.
  • 20. CASE STUDY SMART GRID RFP (DOE) Cooperative Agreement: Smart Grid Research, Development, and Demonstration FOA Number: DE-FOA-0000313 Issue Date: Friday, April 16, 2010 Total Funding Available: $30 million Cost Sharing: 20% for R&D projects; 50% for demonstration projects Highly adaptive protection and control systems are needed to enable smart grid functionality. This announcement consists of three (3) areas of interest addressing the need to develop:  Integrated distribution management systems for distribution automation  Advanced sensing, monitoring, and control technologies for enhanced asset utilization and grid reliability  Voltage regulation and overvoltage protection for high penetration of renewable generation
  • 21. STATE
  • 22. VOLUNTARY MARKET: COMPLIANCE MARKET: DISCRETIONARY MANDATORY  Scenario 1 (sluggish  Scenario 1 (no federal economic growth): 8.6% renewable portfolio CAGR standard): 50% growth by  Scenario 2 (normal 2015 (11.5% CAGR). economic growth 2-2.5%):  Scenario 2 (with 15% 17.2% CAGR standard in all 50 states): 300% growth by 2015 (329 million MWh). Pike Research, 2010
  • 23. CASE STUDY CALIFORNIA  California’s electricity use per-capita has remained relatively stable last 35 years.  Utilities that  By 2020 all new homes in California will be want to zero net energy. By 2030 all commercial buildings will be zero net energy. finance  California has $3.8 billion in rate payer innovation funding for its energy efficiency programs with ratepayer 2010-2012, the largest in the world except dollars have to China. It has a $78 million budget to fund emerging tech. go through the  Utilities not penalized for “selling less” public utilities and incentivized to offer value-added commissions. services.  On the horizon: distributed generation meet target of 33% renewable energy by 2020 (feed in tariff for projects up to 20MW).
  • 24.  NREL is on a steep incline (2000 people up from 1200 two years ago; supercomputing complex for smart grid apps being built; full slate of additional infrastructure plans funded by Recovery Act).  NREL has expressed interest in exploring potential partnerships with NREL pioneered the Danish cleantech firms (Cooperative National R&D Agreements, technical services Alliance of agreements, licensing, etc). Clean Energy  Important event: 23rd Annual Industry Business Growth Forum, Oct 19-21. Incubators
  • 25.  SBIR was established to meet the research and development needs of the federal agencies by providing funding to small businesses to stimulate technological innovation. http://www.oe.energy.gov/sbir.htm  Danish firms are eligible to participate but actual recipient must be 51% US-owned.  Small businesses that win an SBIR award retain the rights to any technology that they develop.
  • 26. Source: nvc.vt.edu … identify players operating within and between clusters who can assist with exploration, market entry and development.
  • 27. …leverage cluster knowledge, relationships and resources to get basic questions answered.
  • 28.  Bloomberg New Energy Finance: US emissions will be 0.4% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 2.0% below 2005 levels by 2030, even without new carbon reduction policies. A major “step- change” in clean energy technology, along with new, more aggressive policies will be needed. The longer the delay, the more costly it will be.  Properly positioned, Danish experience and know-how could “catalyze” this step-change.  Although the “low-hanging fruit” is not quite as close as we’d like, it’s also true that in America, practically anything is still possible.
  • 29. SPECIAL THANKS TO
  • 30. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Danish Cleantech Competences and Potential Anders Stouge, Director Danish Energy Industries Federation Confederation of Danish Industry
  • 31. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Anders Stouge Director ast@di.dk Danish Energy Industries Federation
  • 32. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Confederation of Danish Industry (DI) Committed Industry •DI is a private organisation funded entirely by currently 11,000 companies •DI aims to provide the best possible working conditions for the Danish industry •DI has become a strong common voice for industry with a strong role in society. •DI has a strong international strategy 33
  • 33. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 DI and Trade Federations 34
  • 34. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 • CRONTMIJ Carl Bro A/S • COWI A/S • DONG ENERGY A/S • Vattenfall A/S • SEAS-NVE • TRE FOR • SYD Energi Partner A/S • Danfoss A/S • Grundfos A/S • Logstor A/S • Siemens A/S Logstor A/S • ABB A/S • Haldor Topsoe A/S • Burmeister & Wain Scandinavian Contractor A/S • BWE A/S •Vestas Wind Systems A/S • SolarCap A/S • Semco Maritime A/S 35
  • 35. Denmark has taken a great leap towards being a Bright Green Nation Anders Stouge 25. May 10 with GDP growth, CO2 reductions and stable energy consumption
  • 36. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Denmark is now the leading energy technology exporting nation in the EU 60% Catching Up Growth in exports share 2003-2008 Moving ahead 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Share of total exports 0% -10%Falling behind Loosing momentum 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% Exports to USA: 13% (2009) 37
  • 37. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 US - don't miss the train!! Source: Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy, EIA Energy Conference, 2010 38
  • 38. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Messages from Secretary Chu "We can and must become To achieve our clean energy the global leader in the goals, we need rapid, large- scale deployment of clean energy economy of technology. the future America has the opportunity to lead Technology deployment the world in a new industrial revolution: requires investment. • To ensure American competitiveness, Investment flows toward • Decrease dependency on foreign oil, opportunities for profit. • And mitigate climate change." Market opportunities are structured by policy. Source: EIA Energy Conference, 2010 39
  • 39. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 US and emissions targets Copenhagen Accord: 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. 2013: - 4,75% 2020: - 17,0% 2030: -42,0% 2050: -83,0% Below 2005 levels See: http://kerry.senate.gov/americanpoweract/intro.cfm Came out May 12, 2010 40
  • 40. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 US - Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Total energy use 41
  • 41. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 US - Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Electricity production by source 42
  • 42. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 US - Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Electricity production and renewables 43
  • 43. A large part of electricity production worldwide is still Anders Stouge 25. May 10 produced from fossil fuels, emitting CO2
  • 44. Smart Grid, Denmark and The US Anders Stouge 25. May 10
  • 45. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Where to focus? (1) CO2 CO2 GDP Population Energy (2) CO2 CO2 GDP Population Energy GDP Energy CO2 (3) CO2 Population Population GDP Energy Demography Wealth Energy Carbon Intensity Intensity Kaya Identity 46
  • 46. Where to focus? Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Energy Carbon Demograp Wealt Intensit Intensit hy h y y GDP Energy CO2 CO2 Population Population GDP Energy May be influenced by Difficult to influence choice of technology and instruments Innovative solutions for reduction of CO2 emissions Efficient energy generation Efficient energy distribution  Highly efficient gas and steam turbines  Smart grid  Coal carbon capture storage (CCS)  High-voltage DC transmission systems  Cogeneration  Distributed heating and cooling systems … … Switch to renewables Efficient energy consumption  Wind  Fuel efficient vehicles  Biomass  Building technology measures  Solar  Energy saving lighting …  Energy saving equipment  Energy Management … 47
  • 47. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 The case of Denmark Carbon Intensity vs. Energy Intensity Vejen til lavere udslip af CO2 kræver stort fokus på energieffektiviseringer og CO2-venlig teknologi 80 1990 Carbon Intensity Danmarsk udslip af CO2 i forhold til 70 CO2-udslip nedbringes ved 2000 bruttoenergiforbruget Kg/GJ energieffektiviseringer 60 2008 2025 Hvad er det samfundsøkonomiske byttefold 50 2030 mellem energiintensitet og CO2-intensitet? Har indflydelse på hvordan den ønskede 40 CO2-reduktion opnås, og om det er ensamfunds- økonomisk optimal sti der betrædes 30 Hvilken betydning har det for forsyningssikkerhed? - på kort sigt - på længere sigt 20 CO2-udledningen reduceres med 50 pct. CO2-udslip nedbringes ved Givet BNP og mere CO2-venlige teknologier 10 befolkning i 2030 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Danmark bruttoenergiforbrug i forhold til BNP(GJ/kr.) Kilde: Danmarks statistik, Energi Styrelsen og DI Energibranchen Energy Intensity 48
  • 48. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 How much will sales prices change if energy prices double? 14 12 Energy-price sensitivity , whole Economy 10 Energy -price sensitivity, industry 8 per cent Denmark 6 4 2 0 Taking into account direct and indirect use of energy (input-output calculations) Source: Danmarks Nationalbank, Monetary Review 2nd Quarter 49
  • 49. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Ton CO2 pr. MWh 1,8 1,6 World (average) 1,4 Most efficient power 1,2 plant in Denmark 1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 In the future through research and development 0 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Efficiency percentage Heat/power production ► Most efficient plants ► Energy efficiency
  • 50. Denmark produces a large Anders Stouge proportion of its CO2-free 25. May 10 electricity from solar, wind, geothermal and biomass In 2020 renewable energy sources will account for at least 30% of total Danish final energy consumption
  • 51. Danish companies are among the world leaders in Anders Stouge 25. May 10 developing and commercialising new energy competences
  • 52. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 European Climate Foundation - Roadmap 2050 The costs of 80% RES in 2050 similar to BAU Very important to focus on common EU finance mechanism For RES and the right common framework for building and financing transmissions line - else the calculations will not hold 53
  • 53. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Smart energy systems will curtail the costs Kilde: European Climate Foundation 54
  • 54. Environmentally friendly and intelligent infrastructures are essential Anders Stouge 25. May 10 for achieving the necessary CO2 reductions and secure energy supplies in every region of the world
  • 55. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 Fostering RETs’ transition towards mass market integration Stimulate market pull Technology-neutral Market Deployment Voluntary (green) demand competition TGC Carbon trading (EU ETS) Mature technologies (e.g. hydro) Low cost-gap technologies (e.g. wind onshore) Imposed market risk, guaranteed but declining minimum return Continuity, RD&D, create market attractiveness Price-based: FIP Capital cost incentives: investment tax credits, Quantity-based: TGC with rebates, loan guarantees etc. technology banding Prototype & demonstration High cost-gap stage technologies (e.g. 2nd technologies (e.g. Stability, low-risk incentives generation biofuels) PV) Price-based: FIT, FIP Quantity-based: Tenders Development Niche markets Mass market Time Note: The positions of the various technologies and incentive schemes along the S-curve are an indicative example at a given moment. The actual optimal mix and timing of policy incentives will depend on specific national circumstances. The level of competitiveness will also change in function of the evolving prices of competing technologies.
  • 56. Anders Stouge 25. May 10
  • 57. Anders Stouge 25. May 10 U.S. anchor companies
  • 58. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Danish Business Case in the American Cleantech Market Michael Zarin Director, Government Relations Vestas
  • 59. Wind Energy, Vestas, and U.S. Cleantech Michael Zarin, Vestas Wind Systems A/S
  • 60. VESTAS STARTED THE WIND INDUSTRY AND WE ARE HERE TO STAY - We installed our first wind turbine in 1979 61 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 61. What we do… A new value chain focused on customers 62 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 62. OUR MAIN TASK IS TO SERVE OUR CUSTOMERS - Business Case Certainty - Cost of Energy - Easy to Work With 63 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 63. WE OFFER OUR CUSTOMERS THE BROADEST PRODUCT RANGE KW 2MW 3MW 6MW Platform Platform Platform Platform V52 V80 V90 V60 V82 V112 V90 V100 Constantly improving efficiency on platforms. Competitive and predictable cash flows. 64 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 64. OUR QUALITY IS CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVING - The generating effect of Vestas turbines has grown 100-fold in 30 years - In 2010 our aim is to reach Five Sigma 65 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 65. WIND, OIL AND GAS Our vision is to put wind on a par with oil and gas. 66 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 66. From Vision to Reality 67 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 67. This is not about Quarters – it’s about Years. 68 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 68. Vestas’ Global Manufacturing Footprint Germany Norway Lübeck: Generators Kristiansand: Nacelles Castings Magdeburg: Nacelles Castings Lauchhammer: Blades Sweden Lidköping: Nacelles Castings Guldsmedshyttan: Nacelles Castings Italy Taranto: Nacelles Assembly Blades USA Spain Pueblo, CO: Towers Olvega: Controls Windsor, CO: Blades León: Nacelles Assembly Brighton, CO: Blades Vivero: Nacelles Assembly Nacelles Assembly Damiel: Blades India Chennai: Nacelles Assembly Denmark Lem: Blades Controls China Nacelles Machining Tianjin: Nacelles Assembly Skagen: Nacelles Machining & Hubs Blades Varde: Towers Generators Rudkøbing: Towers Controls Ringkøbing: Nacelles Assembly Nacelles Machining Viborg: Nacelles Assembly Xuzhou: Nacelles Casting Hammel: Controls Hohhot: V60 Factory Complex Nakskov: Blades (Blades, Controls, Nacelles Assembly) 69 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 69. Our Biggest Markets are in Europe, US, Asia 70 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 70. Globally Installed Wind Power Capacity 2003-2009 71 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010 GWEC, 2010
  • 71. Vestas and the U.S. market
  • 72. In the region, for the region – U.S. market Service & Sales and Sourcing Nacelles Blades Towers R&D Maintenance HQ •Houston, TX •Portland, OR •Brighton,CO •Chicago, IL •Brighton,CO •Windsor, CO •Pueblo, CO •Brighton, CO •Boston, MA + rep offices •Brighton, CO 73 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 73. Vestas is the largest Job Creator in the US wind industry: We know of no other company in our industry that invests* more in the US than we do. * ~ USD 1 Billion 74 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 74. Vestas: Supplying the U.S. market Ramping up in Colorado • North America manufacturing base – four factories in Colorado • Sourcing office in Chicago – North America supply chain in areas such as castings, metal fabrication, Nacelles, Brighton composites, gears, bearings, and electro-mechanical components • Some of our main suppliers have established themselves in the U.S. • Suppliers are qualified through PPAP (Production Part Towers, Pueblo Approval Process) • Process is highly rigorous • Some examples of qualified suppliers have been in machining, sheet metal, weldings and wiring Source: American Wind Energy Association and Vestas Wind Systems A/S Blades, Brighton 75 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 75. Recovery underway… new challenges emerge • Strong five-year North American industry forecast • 2009 an active year, driven by pre-crisis financing and power purchase agreements • Vestas ramping up for continued market growth • U.S. approves >$1billion in ITC Grants to developers • Capital infusions may allow developers to initiate new projects • First indications that Congress may be open to extending program in 2011 • Policy environment relatively good, but much work remains • National renewable energy standard would drive near-term investment • Energy and climate legislation could also provide a boost • Some state renewable energy requirements being challenged, but holding ground • Green Energy Act in Ontario and transmission expansion in Alberta boost Canadian outlook • Ontario domestic production requirements – making the best of an unfortunate policy 76 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 76. Principle Challenges • Wholesale power prices low; affects prices for power purchase agreements for wind and other sources • Recession reduces overall U.S. demand for electricity by 6.5% • Low natural gas prices, as unconventional gas supplies reach market while consumer demand falls • Wildlife concerns could hamper siting of projects in parts of U.S. • E.g., Wyoming ban on wind in Sage Grouse Core Areas, may extend to other western states • Public opposition to utility-scale wind growing in some parts of U.S. and Canada • Increasing press coverage of noise and purported health concerns • Transmission access is a challenge in much of the best wind regimes • Challenge is both physical access as well as cost to get on line • U.S. Manufacturers Tax Credit is over subscribed • Some political pressure to increase local content requirements 77 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010
  • 77. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Copyright Notice The documents are created by Vestas Wind Systems A/S and contain copyrighted material, trademarks, and other proprietary information. All rights reserved. No part of the documents may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means—such as graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems without the prior written permission of Vestas Wind Systems A/S. The use of these documents by you, or anyone else authorized by you, is prohibited unless specifically permitted by Vestas Wind Systems A/S. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from the documents. The documents are provided ―as is‖ and Vestas Wind Systems A/S shall not have any responsibility or liability whatsoever for the results of use of the documents by you. 78 | Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 25 May 2010 Vestas wishes to acknowledge and respect all copyrights in connection with the illustrations used in this presentation. In case we have unintentionally violated copyrighted material, we want to be informed immediately in order to straighten things out and thus to honour any obligatory fees.
  • 78. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Q&A
  • 79. Europæiske 25 May 2010 energiselskaber Networking and Snacks