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