CARBON NANOFIBER SUPERCAPACITOR

Steve Miller, Gabe Schwartz, Rebekah Shirley, Joe Wofford

Introduction

2

Who are we? •  Joe Wofford – PhD Materials Science 2011 • Rebekah Shirley – MS Energy & Resources 2011 • Steve Miller – MBA 2011 • Gabe Schwartz – MBA 2011

What are we doing here? • Discuss LBNL / Stanford proof of concept (Dr. Yuegang Zhang, Dr. Yi Cui) • Assess the market to determine value and next steps

What are we going to talk about? • Growing importance of supercapacitors • Potential value and implications of early stage LBL / Stanford Lab tech • How it fits into the market & industry landscape • Conclusions and recommendations

Broad and sustained market trends create demand for supercapacitors

Unplug everything

High functionality, small size

Global clean energy focus

Off-grid power

3

$877M market by 2014

Energy and power intensive applications,

larger peak-power demands

Wind turbines & hybrids need large power boosts

Requires efficient energy storage solutions

Source: Lux Research

Why supercapacitors?

4

  Long Cycle Life (1,000x >Batteries)   High Efficiency

  High Reliability and Low Maintenance   Wide Working Temperature

More Supercapacitor Advantages

Power: Primary Supercapacitor Advantage

Cost is the key market consideration and barrier for mass adoption

5

Both increasing volumes and technological innovation will lower costs, driving further demand growth

2001 2011 Target for mass adoption

Cost down 90% in last 10 yrs

Still 20-200% too expensive

Materials 60-70% of total

cost

Cost Per Farad Progression Cost Breakdown

A new approach to carbon electrodes

6

Nanoporouscarbon

1F1F

Moreac0vesurfacearea

Highercapacitanceperarea(3X)

=

Carbonnanofibers

Prior Approaches: Planar Substrate

Our Approach: 3D Foam Substrate

Leads to increased energy storage without sacrificing power

7 Source: Kotz & Carlen; “Principles and applications of electrochemical capacitors”, Electrochimica Acta 45 (2000)

High Power Low Energy

+

+

+

+

+ + +

+ +

+

- - - - - -

- - - - - -

- - - - - -

Thick electrodes with low resistance higher energy without the typical power tradeoff

3D Foam Substrate Thin Active Layer Thick Active Layer

+ + +

-

- -

- - -

- -

-

- -

-

+ - - -

Low Power High Energy

High Power High Energy

Basic development could make device competitive with industry leaders

8

100

1000

104

105

106

0.1 1 10

W/L

Wh/L

Optimization Steps (<1 yr) ①  Bench-top unit ②  Organic

electrolyte ③  Geometric

optimization ④  Tailored

carbon 1

2

3

4

Energy Density (Watt-Hours/Liter)

Pow

er D

ensi

ty (W

atts

/Lite

r)

Projected cost advantage is uncertain with current data & processes

9

21.0 14.6

19.6 15.2

27.1 36.5

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

Maxwell Our Tech (Projected)

Tota

l Cos

t

Production Other Materials Electrode

$67 $55 - 90

Cost Comparison for a 2,600F Cell

Avoided premium for activated carbon lower material costs Production costs present the biggest risk to cost parity

Source: Frost and Sullivan

Projections suggest real-world value

10

Improved Performance

~50% higher energy density

Reduced balance of system materials

Differentiated Process

No activation step (deposition)

Less energy intense

Could offset competitors’ scale

Energy Density Cost Cost

Performance & cost competitive with simple optimization ?

IP most valuable if low-cost, high-speed manufacturing possible

Whether these translate to commercial relevance depends heavily on market & industry dynamics

Supercapacitor applications fall within three primary markets

11

  BurstPower  Regenera0vePower  BoardnetStabiliza0on

  BurstPower  Regenera0vePower  BackupPower

  BurstPower  BaGeryLifeExtension  QuickCharge

Industrial Transporta/onConsumer

2014 Market Size $109M

2014 Market Size $218M

2014MarketSize

$550MSource: Lux Research

Competitive landscape is the tale of two markets

12

MarketApplica/onFocus

IndustrialandTransporta/onConsumer

Source: Lux Research

Commercializa/

onStage

Incumbe

nts

Start‐Ups

OEMsandEndUsers

Start-ups leveraging new technology to disconnect from incumbent value chain

13

However,moststart‐upsareinsulatedfromthismanufacturingprocess

andvaluechain

MaxwellandEnerG2aimtosupplyelectrode

materialtoincumbentmanufacturers

CellandModuleManufacturers

ElectrodeandMaterialManufacturers

Commercializa/

onStage

Incumbe

nts

Start‐Ups

A.C.

Key adoption considerations revolve around cost per power

14

Handsets,Cameras

PowerTools

WindTurbines

Cranes,ForkliIs UPS

HybridHeavyVehicles

LightVehicles

Cost

Power

Energy

CycleLife

Reliability

TempRange

PrimaryAdop/onConsidera/ons

Industrial Transporta/onConsumer

Industrial and heavy transportation markets present the best fit for this technology

Light Vehicles

Hybrid Heavy Vehicles

Wind Turbines

Cranes, Forklifts

UPS

Handsets, Cameras

Power Tools

Military, Space

Smart Meters

Ease

of E

ntry

(T

ime

to M

arke

t, R

elat

ions

hips

)

Alignment with Market Requirements (Cost, Energy Density)

Note: Bubble size represents the relative size of the addressable market in 2014 15

Competitive standalone product unlikely, but could be valuable as a complement to innovators pursuing these markets

Two potential paths for technology progression

16

ValueProp

CustomerAOributes

Approach

TargetMarkets

Higher energy density, lower material costs, novel process

High specific surface area carbon

Heavy hybrids, wind turbines, military & space

Water desalinization, metal recovery, hydrogen storage, Li-

ion battery electrodes

Willing to experiment, can integrate w/ process, targeting

industrial & heavy transport

Less cost sensitive, looking to solve surface area specifically

License IP to a startup Customer discovery, licensing or joint development

SupercapacitorComplementaryValue

BroaderMarketApplica/ons

Summary and next steps

  Promising proof of concept, significant room for optimization   Energy density improvement of up to 50%   Maintained power and cycle life   Unique approach could lead to materials and process cost savings

  Industry focused on cost   Need to understand manufacturing costs at scale   Startups with similar non-AC processes are best positioned to

incorporate this research into a competitive product

  Two likely paths forward   Complementary value to other supercap startups, e.g. FastCap –

explore licensing interest   High potential value in non-supercapacitor applications, i.e. battery

electrodes, water treatment, and fuel cells

17

APPENDIX

Much Insight comes from Discussion with Industry Professionals

19

• “Important for an electrode to fit into pre-existing manufacturing process.” • “Demonstrate either ability to be integrated or significant performance gain”

Christine Ho Imprint Energy, Co-Founder

• “A company’s electrode is the ‘secret sauce’ of supercapacitors” • “While companies tend to manufacture their own electrodes, there is a market for electrode materials”

Kelsey Lynn Fire Lake Capital, Partner Energ2, Board Observer

• “You have to ask yourself where your core competence lies” • “Each application requires something different. Know what you’re good at… and make sure you understand the length of the sales & design cycle”

Riccardo Signorelli FastCAP, President and CEO

• “Response time is an important characteristic of supercapacitor performance” • “There may be other markets for high surface area, high specific capacitance carbon materials”

John Miller JME Inc., Founder

• “Focus on lifetime, rather than upfront, costs” • “You have to be able to manufacture at speed, at least 15 meters per minute” • Companies are very reluctant to license out. They will license in, but this involves a lot of time and money for testing and joint development”

Chad Hall Ioxus, VP Sales

Comparison with battery technologies

20

Features Lead Acid Battery Lithium-Ion Battery Supercapacitor

PowerDensity(W/L) ~350‐450 ~500‐5,800 ~1,000‐90,000

Energy Density (Wh/L) ~150‐550 ~60‐90 ~1‐11

Life Cycle ~500‐800 ~500‐3,500 ~500,000‐1,000,000

Efficiency(%) ~80% ~90% ~95%

Work Temperature (oC) ~(30)‐45 ~(20)‐60 ~(40)‐85

Cost/Power ($/kW) ~$25‐100 ~$25‐400 ~$5‐35

Cost/Energy ($/kWh) ~$200‐400 ~$350‐1,000 ~$13,000‐3,000,000

Source:LuxResearch

Note: Electrodes’ volumetric performance is typically more relevant than gravimetric once balance of system is taken into account. A 2x difference in electrode Wh/kg would only produce a spread of a few oz. in a large device, while the same 2x in Wh/L would translate directly to device size.

Complementary value with batteries

21

Advantages of Carbon Nanofibers

22

Process: low pressure vapor deposition

23

Electrode performance as a function of active layer thickness

24

1)Kotz,R.;Carlen,M.;“Principlesandapplica0onsofelectrochemicalcapacitors”,ElectrochimicaActa45,2483‐2498(2000).

60%

40%

Materials Assembly

Cost Breakdown 25

25%

10%

15%

50%

Packaging Seperator Electrolyte Electrode

50%

25%

10%

15%

  Materialsaccountforalargepor0onofoverallcostscomparedtootherstoragetechnologies

  Electrodeasignificantpor0onofthesematerialcosts

Material costs Production costs

60%40%

25

Projected cost differential is uncertain

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

Maxwell 2,600F Cell

This Tech - 2,600F Cell

Material Costs

Al203 Nickel Foam Ethylene Binder Activated Carbon Current Collector Packaging

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

Maxwell 2,600F Cell

This Tech - 2,600F Cell

Processing Costs

Deposition Passivation Slurry / Pasting Cell Assembly

26

??

This Tech Total: $50 - 90

Maxwell Total: $67

Assumes: •  15-30% savings in the carbon electrode •  67% savings in the separator •  10% savings in packaging

Market applications detail

27

Markets 2014MarketSize Functions Primary Adoption Considerations

Handsets/Cameras ~$539M QuickCharge,BurstPowerCost/Power,PowerDensity,Life0me

PowerTools ~$9M QuickCharge,BurstPowerCost/Power,Cycling,Life0me

WindTurbines ~$20M BurstPower,QuickCyclingCycling,LowMaintenance,TempDurability

Elevators/Cranes/Forklihs <$50MRegenera0vePower,BurstPower

Durability,Reliability,DeepDischargeCycling,TempDurability

UPS <$50M BackUpPowerReliability,LowMaintenance,Life0me

HybridVehicles/Buses ~$218M ColdStart,Regenera0vePowerCost/Power,Power/EnergyDensity,TempDurability

ElectricTrains <$50M ColdStart,Regenera0vePowerCost/Power,Power/EnergyDensity,TempDurability

Consumer

Industrial

Transporta/on

Non Supercapacitor Application Details

28

  3D Macroporous Carbon Negative Electrode enhances rate performance of Li-ion batteries: Higher Surface Area > Increased Number of Active Sites for Charge Transfer Reactions

  Capacitive Deionization is being e x p l o r e d f o r l o w - c o s t w a t e r desalination and metal recovery using high specific area carbon materials: Higher Surface Area > Increased area for ion absorption

  H o l l o w g e o m e t r y o f C a r b o n nanostructures is a solution to storing Hydrogen Gas for Hydrogen Fuel Cells: Higher Specific Surface Area > Higher amount of adsorbate per surface area

Hybrid applications: supercap-battery hybrid energy devices based on nanocomposites

29