Organic Flash Cycle (“OFC”)
Transcript of Organic Flash Cycle (“OFC”)
Organic Flash Cycle (“OFC”)
C2M Team Andrew Collier, MBA 2013 Christian Di Sanzo, PhD Nuclear Eng. 2013 Amir Khan, MBA 2013 Paul Maa, MBA 2013 Min Ting, PhD Mechanical Eng. 2015
HEAT IS POWER…
LET’S CAPTURE IT.
Scientist Tony Ho, PhD Mechanical Eng. 2012
A Massive Opportunity in Heat-to-Power
2 = 2,000,000 GWh / Year in U.S. Alone
BIOMASS GEOTHERMAL
SOLAR THERMAL INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES 60% of Waste Heat is Low Temperature
INDUSTRIAL WASTE HEAT
/
/
Global Markets Served By Organic Rankine Cycle
3
1+ GW of ORC technology installed by multiple players across multiple markets
Note: Team Estimates. Global Market Share, by Total Power
Incumbent Technology: Organic Rankine Cycle
4
Organic Rankine Cycle
Pump
Turbine
Condenser
G Heater
Liquid
Gas
Gas
Liquid 1
2
3
1
2
3
4 4 Heat Input
Organic Rankine Cycle
Technology Overview: Our Technology OFC
OFC Gas
Liquid
5
Technology Overview: Our Technology OFC
6
OFC The OFC is 10% more efficient than the Organic Rankine Cycle • 11% shorter payback period • 29% higher EOL value
EFFICIENCY
COST
Heater: 60 %
Heater: 40 % Extra:15%
Organic Rankine Cycle
OFC
Lead to 5% saving
The OFC is 10% more efficient,
5% cheaper, and all the components
are readily available.
Market Assessment
7 Market Appetite
Tech
nolo
gica
l Com
plex
ity
High
M
ediu
m
Low
Low Medium High
Market Size
Waste Heat Generation
Food & beverage
Geothermal
Simple cycle
Land transportation
Refineries & chemical plants
Cement production
Glass & ceramics fabrication
Wood biomass
Landfill gas
Remote waste heat (pipeline compression)
Solar
Metals manufacturing
Marine transport
Market Attractiveness
8
Market Segment
Projected Growth
Competitive Pressure
Available Incentives
Geothermal
Metals Manufacturing
Food & Beverage
Medium High Low
Attractiveness
9.5% CAGR
<5.5% CAGR
3.5% CAGR
>50 Installations
<15 Installations
<15 Installations
US Federal & EU Incentives
US State-by-State & EU Incentives
US State-by-State & EU Incentives
Sources: Emerging Energy Research (EER) IMAP. Food & Beverage Industry Global Report (2010) Global Metal Industry 2012-2017
Sources: EPA CHP Partnership Websites of ORC Vendors
Sources: DSIRE Bloomberg New Energy Finance
Path to Market
9
Team OFC Today
No Patent
Patent
License IP
Range of Available Options
Suspend All Activity
Open Source Consulting
Start Company Inventor Buys License
Incumbent Buys License
Prospective Partners for Licensing
10
Licensing Appetite
Dedicated Group for Transition
Degree of Overlap with Identified Markets
Company Growth Prospects
Having detailed conversations with these potential partners post C2M
Risks & Mitigants
11
Risk Description Mitigant
Technology Development
Incumbent Technology
Sales Cycle
Lifecycle Costs
Technology is not proven yet
Reliability of the physical model used
Competitors to OFC are under
development
No new components, quick
development
O&M costs are potentially higher
for OFC
Organic Rankine Cycle useful life is
20+ years
In U.S., only 7% of market is
exploited
Increase, but moderate
Proposed Timeline
12
Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 2013 2014+
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Non-Provisional Patent Application
`
Arrange Licensing Process
Initiate Funding Application
Prototype Testing
Market Testing
LBNL/Scientists Licensee Company
Key Takeaways
13
Compared to a 1MW Organic Rankine Cycle system, the OFC is:
Cheaper by 5%
10% more efficient
Comprised of readily available components
Heat is Power…Let’s Capture It!
Thank You!
14
Q&A