GLOBE Canada Clean Tech Innovation Workshop Report

A Summary of the Workshop Held March 1, 2016 Vancouver, BC

2

Table of Contents

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3

1. Celebrating Successes ................................................................................................. 4

2. Areas with Scope for Improvement ........................................................................... 6

3. Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 12

4. Prioritization of Recommendations......................................................................... 14

5. Summary .................................................................................................................... 15

6. Appendix 1: Workshop Participants ........................................................................ 16

7. Appendix 2: Dotmocracy Results ............................................................................. 17

3

Introduction The Canadian Clean Technology sector is at a crossroad. Global demand for clean technology

solutions is at an all-time high and is growing faster than most other segments of the economy.

Estimated to be over a trillion dollars annually – the prize is substantive and growing. However,

Canada’s share of the global opportunity is slipping. A slow developing policy environment for

climate change and limited Federal government support for the past 10-years have resulted in a

sector that has languished. Our efforts in the presence of jurisdictions that have been more

aggressive including China, Germany, Israel, and the United States need to be improved.

To help identify potential areas for improvement the Delphi Group, on behalf of the GLOBE series,

organized the Canada Clean Tech Innovation Workshop, held on March 1, 2016, during GLOBE

Week in Vancouver, BC. The workshop was generously supported by Cenovus Energy, the Climate

Change Emissions Management Corporation, Capital Road Foundation, Genome BC, Kinetica

Ventures and Sustainable Development Technology Canada. The opinions expressed in this report

represent the views of the participants and not necessarily those of the funders. The workshop

participants included clean tech funders, government, accelerators and incubators, industry and

innovators from across Canada. A list of participants can be found in Appendix 1.

The GLOBE Clean Tech Workshop is seen to offer the opportunity of a reset. A turning point that

could leverage off provincial investments in capacity building and a reinvigorated Federal strategy

supported by a major funding infusion with the March 2016 budget. The workshop began with the

recognition that the news is not all bad and discussion in the first breakout focused on the positive

elements that are present in Canada. Workshop participants identified global leadership in Carbon

Capture and Storage and verification as well as strengths in policy innovation coupled with active

Industry collaboration on priority challenges – Canada is clearly innovating in innovation.

In an effort to underscore the fact that more work needs to be done the workshop turned its

attention to challenges in session 2. As one might expect, systemic areas of improvement were high

on the list. Funding and financing was a key focus of attention as was the need for better

information that can be used to make program and policy decisions. All of the barriers described

repeatedly called for better coordination and cooperation for the sector.

Perhaps one of the most compelling findings was the view that time is of the essence. While there is

the sense that coordination of public and private sector interests is both timely and relevant the

issue of how much more consultation is needed was clearly less attractive than the need to create

momentum. Leveraging what we know and using early wins to build traction will allow the sector

to move to a position of global competitiveness as quickly as possible and in doing so increase the

capacity to solve pressing domestic issues at the heart of Canada’s industrial competitiveness. A

number of areas were underscored and were the focus of opportunities and discussion on next

steps and recommendations in session 3 of the workshop, and also summarized in this report.

Finally, participants voted on their top priority recommendation in each of the respective themes

used to organize the discussions. These themes included:

1. Financing/Investment (public and private)

2. Policies and incentives/Non-financial support (IP, tax, export etc.) at all levels

3. Information/Process of getting solution providers through the system/steps

4

4. System Coordination (between TRL levels and between organizations and jurisdictions)

The results of the dotmocracy exercise are summarized at the end of this report. The following

sections list the main points from the table discussions, and note the main conclusions.

1. Celebrating Successes

Breakout groups were posed the following questions:

“What are the top 3 or 4 things we do well in clean tech innovation in Canada?”

“What are the criteria behind these successes?”

The following list captures the themes and details that were discussed in the four breakout groups.

A number of the successes noted were mentioned in more than one discussion group, and have thus

been combined.

Technology Readiness Levels Success Stories

TRL 1-3 Canada has no trouble filling the clean tech idea funnel. Good ideas and support for research

and development are plentiful; even disruptive ideas can be found

We are getting better at turning ideas into companies, even though we need to do this faster

We have cross functional teams of expertise, and a culture of collaboration

Canadian start-ups are proficient at stretching the investment dollars to cover as much of the early stage work as possible. Our tech development companies learn to run lean, which helps them in the next phase of their business development.

TRL 4-6 • MARS advisory services • Qualified introductions to companies that have a greater probability of success TRL 4 - 8 The Canadian clean tech focused funds, most notably SDTC, have earned a reputation of picking

winners. The fact that SDTC looks at the economic viability of the technology well before the

company is ready for market launch strengthens the assessment (and provides valuable

guidance to the applicant).

CCEMC is another long play investor with a similar reputation.

The SDTC “stamp of approval” is worth gold to the successful applicant in that it is known to the investment community for bringing them qualified deal flow. It opens the doors to investors

and tech adopters.

5

Private Investment

Corporate strategics act as shareholders through the pilot phase are engaged. They are more patient than typical VCs and often have deeper pockets. Hatch and Enbridge are two examples.

There is a cohesive cleantech financing community Kensington V-CAP fund is a success story. But needs to be very specific. Targeted at high net

worth individuals and engaging the broader public in venture investing. The Angel Investor community is engaged. The Cleantech sector appeals to those wanting to

make a difference. There are investors who want to be seen as being on the side of the angels.

Human Capital

Human capital in this sector is at an early and interim stage of maturation There is good talent available as mid/late career professionals provide almost “pro bono”

services, but submarket wages for early career opportunities. Diversity of the sector and great-educated workforce in Canada. Education system is leveraged

well. Engineering talent in Canada is really good. There are a lot of thoughts of this potentially not continuing and trends are showing decreased numbers of STEM students.

Government Involvement and Policy

All levels of government are on board for a similar goal (BC example) but need to coordinate this better in order to realize the goals.

Recognition from government that the early stage is a tough place to get funding so government has been stepping in.

Favourable rules: Collaboration between funding agencies to leverage resources and dollars. BDC – has been effective through the deployment of a sizable amount of capital. Policy instruments such as SRED, carbon tax, carbon registry, carbon pricing, the specified gas

emitters regulation in Alberta and the tech fund have supported clean tech Renewed focus by all levels of government indicates that there will be ongoing support or

increased support for cleantech, e.g. Mission Innovation – doubling the government’s spending on clean Energy R&D

Industry Organization/Representation:

Cleantech CEO alliance in BC, Écotech in Quebec, Alberta Cleantech Industry Alliance and others

Innovation Tools and Technical Success Areas:

Challenge Processes: bringing in the user to define the problem and look for the solutions. Collaboration across value chains. Science & Research Side Project leadership through Canadian environmental service companies like Hatch and SNC

Lavalin Technical strengths include:

o World leader in CCS, Carbon storage monitoring and verification

6

o Ability to execute on major Solar and Wind projects o Enerkem waste facility - large scale diversion o Organics diversion

Collaboration and Partnerships

COSIA model – joint venture and collaboration Nuclear development was a good example of a well-coordinated effort in Canada to advance a

sector AOSTRA – focused collaboration with a very specific outcome and goals. Economic prosperity

was the main driver. This was a similar effort to the nuclear sector growth. We need to recognize early signs of success both in the system and for technologies. We are

starting to have this conversation as a system Starting to recognize that failure is an important part of this process The discussion summarized above also led to comments and questions qualifying the success stories, and are relevant to the other discussion topics covered in the workshop and summarized here. They also link the advancement of clean tech innovation in Canada to the broader context in which progress will happen. Comments:

- Successes have been mainly on the public side - private investment has been more of a challenge because of long time frames

- Has the money gathered in a critical amount in order to be effective? - Measuring success is different between public and private investment. Goals are different

but need to have similar motivations and success measures. Private investment is concerned with financial returns and company growth. Public funds are focused on GHG reductions as a primary goal or growth of GDP and jobs creation.

- Environment has become the driver (public will). There are opportunities to make money in Clean Tech. Examples of how clean tech can offer this:

o Opportunities in Alberta with coal plants being shut down. o Level of wind power deployed in Alberta.

- Challenge in Clean tech is the diversity of kinds of clean tech companies, which confuses government.

- There is a concern that there won’t be as much money to subsidize the clean tech sector going forward as taxes are currently low and not collecting very much revenue.

Historically big companies used to fund smaller companies. There may not

the backup of bigger companies doing deals in the future.

2. Areas with Scope for Improvement

The second breakout focused discussion on areas for improvement including the identification of

gaps and barriers, leveraging the session one discussions, summarized above. The areas with scope

for improvement are listed by themes below.

7

Financing and Investment

The first-of-a-kind facility in the clean tech sector is expensive. There should be more efficient

forms of financing than equity financing for the first of a kind. The fact that the technology in

question has not been around very long does not provide assurances that bankers need for that

size of the investment. Those loans cost more to service. The second half of the first decade of a

start-up’s existence becomes the second valley of death. Some form of loan to bridge the hi-cap

gap is needed (e.g. the SDTC Next Generation BioFuels model), or other type of loan guarantee.

Other countries have developed loans guarantee programs to support launch.

Stacking of funding and complexity of what a tech company targets for each subsequent round of investment is a challenge. Streamlining this process would be beneficial and it would be beneficial to have an understanding of all the funding players and where they play.

Need to do a better job at picking winners by eliminating funding when things are not working. – SRED dollars need to be more strategic and not last forever.

Need to align metrics of success, and define what is success? Financial and environmental and social.

Ratio of dollars that go to technology validation relative to business validation is skewed – need more business validation to ensure there is product market fit.

Need to do a better job at attracting private funds from high net worth individuals and private dollars in order to expand the amount of available capital.

How do you incentivize advancements from government? ARPA -E in the US is a success story. ARPA-E has made bets on big game changers. They don’t have a big budget and they are very flexible on hiring and other internal policies in order to make the system produce results. Very rigorous performance objectives and projects will be killed quickly if it is not working. People leaving work at ARPA-E go to work for the cutting edge companies. They have the commercialization /market group that is very effective at deploying capital.

Managing risk such as ‘first loss’ on projects Coordination across funding e.g., venture funds/EDC/CCEMC/MaRS System coordination working across time horizons EDC trying to optimize players coming to help, not hurt the company’s chances SDTC’s life cycle is the anchor for EDC framework Canada can be fair to a fault, many countries are successful by bypassing WTO requirements

and support home based innovation. We either don’t try hard enough or we don’t try at all

We are good at the seed stage, but Angel groups are not engaged Venture capital has been one of the least innovative industries. Need to look at different models

that work with the clean tech sector. Need to encourage ways to modify the VC business model. Cleantech companies stay small longer than other forms of start-up due to the greater capital

intensity of the typical clean tech solution. These are not ICT plays. Investors need to understand this reality.

Facilitating more matchmaking between start-ups and investors (especially angels) would help. Key questions and takeaways: What mechanisms are available that would help provide financing to first of kind

commercialization projects/technologies?

How can we model or take learnings from the ARPA – E model in the US?

In what ways can we innovate the VC business model to support specific investment in the clean tech sector?

8

There is a need to clearly define and articulate metrics of success that are being used to

evaluate projects and portfolios.

There is a need for greater transparency and coordination between all of the funding provider that a technology company would be looking to engage with throughout the development cycle.

TRL and Technical Gaps and Challenges

Lack of independent third party to validate performance claims.

Some technologies could use an industry supported demo site (e.g. a microgrid test bed). Better yet, have an internationally recognized assessor to oversee the testing (e.g. an NREL or an

EPRI).

Commercial scale is not the same as commercially viable. The first plant may not even be

intended to be profitable. Industry needs help to scale up to where economies of scale kick in.

Other countries (e.g. Norway) permit more favourable accounting rules for these first-of-a-kind

(e.g. depreciation)

Demonstrations in Canada are rarely sufficient to entice a foreign buyer/investor. This is

particularly the case when there are unique climate considerations or different feedstocks

pertain. Sometimes it is just a matter of foreign buyers not being familiar with what is going on

in Canada. There are good examples where a foreign participant/investor in the domestic

demonstration bridges that credibility gap. Otherwise the demonstration has to be in the

country where the sales are expected.

We don’t take a value-add, “what can we do” approach to our industries (Finland forestry as an example). How do you integrate existing things we are good at with new technology

development?

o Link needs to be in place between value-add innovation and industry

Canada has separated industry from innovation

Industry has a time problem – 5-7 turnaround period which gives you about one shot in 7 years

Industry – tech decisions are locked in way in advance and then in place for a long term o E.g. mining decision locked down 10 years in advance then in operation 40 year

Key questions and takeaways:

Support is needed from industry and government in the demonstration to commercialization stage. Both in terms of sites and an understanding of intended outcomes (project may not be

financially viable)

Lack of Understanding and Data about the Clean Tech Industry

What’s in and what’s not is a problem, we need a common definition Lack of data – we need metrics and evaluation to make better choices We can do a better job of collecting/collating the data on the real picture of the outcome of

government investment and monitoring of the knock-on job/company creation.

9

Key questions and takeaways: There is a need for additional data collection and management in order to support better

decision-making in the clean tech sector.

Intellectual Property

Policies related to IP ownership is a challenge – Universities have a play on licensing fees that are limiting potential, examples of good Tech/IP transfer are: ▪ Waterloo has an excellent program ▪ U of C has 800 patents by creating a protected environment ▪ MaRS Innovates has a program but it needs to be more consistent ▪ Sweden and Norway are other examples of systems that are seen as working

We are not getting good ideas out of the universities (and government labs) fast enough. With some notable exceptions, IP ownership issues are a major barrier. Changes to IP rights for

individual academics and companies they collaborate with are slowly propagating. The concept

of Open Innovation is helping, as is the use of commercial contracts to cover technology

development undertaken jointly within government labs. More work in this area is required.

Universities that promote cross-disciplinary approach to sustainable development are more

productive than those who keep within departmental silos.

The securing of IP is a major risk for start-ups. It should be an eligible cost for government

funding such as SRED

Inventors do not have their incentives aligned enough with industry, including issues such as: o Universities will not pay for the patent cost

o Patenting at the correct time

o Even for outside of the university system patents are often not an eligible cost

o Inventors cannot charge back to NSERC

NRC – anything they invent belongs to the crown. President can assign IP:

o Barrier to partnering Key questions and takeaways: There many opportunities to strengthen the way that IP ownership could be improved in order

to support and incentivise start-ups.

There are also opportunities to provide funding coverage for IP under SRED for example.

Policies and Government Levers

Government procurement could provide better support but there is currently no appetite for risk, so new technologies are not contracted by government. Government should take advantage of its longer-term payback potential to support new technologies

Policies need to be consistent across governments, need to be able to work across levels of government, how we incent innovation

The economic drivers for clean technology are heavily dependent on policy (e.g. the price of

carbon), and regulations, which both are in flux. This technology sector may not take off until

the policy makers and regulators start sending more consistent signals.

While SR&ED is critical to getting companies going, we should adopt the best practices of other countries – e.g. granting flow through tax credits to the strategic investors very effective in the US.

10

There is merit in having the various levels of government within Canada be required to be demo

hosts and/or buy the first commercial embodiment of new technology. On the other hand,

government procurement cycles are so slow, tying up company resources to serve that class of

customer may erase any time to market advantage.

Governments worry too much about the stickiness of the investment. If the company is any good, it will stay. Employment tends to grow where the first demonstration happens or the pilot

plant is built. Funders should be thinking of the investment in terms of the human capital.

Beyond that, there should be recognition of value “beyond the liquidity event”. There are

examples where acquisitions become centers of excellence for a multinational (e.g. Xantrex

becoming Schneider Electric’s Solar business unit).

Energy policy in Canada has been developed in different context and with intentions than growing the clean tech sector. When applied in a clean tech context, current policy can penalize SMEs

o E.g. if you are doing EOR you have to acquire wells you go into which triggers liability to province…have to put up bonds (pay into orphan wells). This policy is designed for big companies.

Key questions and takeaways:

There are opportunities to make minor adjustment to current policies and enable greater incentives to finance and invest in the clean tech sector. For example, flow through tax credits

have been very effective in the US and would be a small change to make in Canada in order to be

effective.

Better coordination and standardization of policies at all levels of government would benefit the sector and provide better clarity on the investment opportunities available.

Non-Financial and Cultural/Attitudinal Aspects and Patterns

The ecosystem is very geared towards technical validation and would benefit from an evaluation of company readiness level and market fit. Would benefit from metrics and ways to

track business success – ERL (entrepreneurship readiness level) level instead of TRL for

business risk.

Need a pipeline for the transformative stuff. There are smart ways to do risk retirement that is not widely used in Canada. Need to consider jobs and impact on smaller communities. Need to position Canada as a clean tech export provider. Companies can’t deploy projects

because they don’t have things like bonding. Need to backstop companies so they can be competitive on the global market.

Canadian firms tend to think “small”. They have to be thinking global from day one. Sales and

distribution channels outside of Canada are important. We’re not as good at implementing

those business essentials as start-ups in some other countries.

Going global often involves forming joint ventures with foreign companies. There needs to be greater awareness of how to balance growth vs. control.

The level of innovation in the deal flow funnel has to be increased. The Canadian investors that our companies pitch to “are not listening for what is different” but rather “are looking for what

11

they’ve heard before”. This is especially true with sector based investors. We need to encourage

ideas that have the potential to disrupt markets.

Need a better overall strategy for clean tech adoption – companies can have a substitution application but are not always considering disruptive

Market is defined by systems integration. Need to be better at integrating

o Most work needs to be done by engineering and systems integration Key questions and takeaways:

Are there ways to position Canada as a clean tech export provider? This will require some additional support from policy and rethinking business models to enable Canadian firms to

compete on the global market.

There is a need to think beyond a replacement strategy, only considering technologies that can substitute into a system and look to transformative technologies.

Human Capital

There is a lack of sales marketing business development talent in Canada. Need to streamline the process of bringing in people with specific talents on the business side of things.

There is a dearth of skilled managers who have experience in scaling up operations. These have to be recruited from abroad. They don’t come cheap. They don’t come quickly. Those people

that Canada has with the right skills are often entering retirement.

Tech developers often demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of commercial financing

Canadian firms raise less per round, pay less for their critical hires and fail to attract the best

talent.

Key questions and takeaways:

Attracting the top talent from around the globe is a high priority and needs to be coordinated in

a way to make it easier for skilled business managers, sales executives and other people who

are at the top of their field to work in Canada and be attracted to this market.

System Coordination

Everyone agrees on the ultimate outcome but there is not clarity on how to move the companies through the steps in the system

Form a task force to inform government level policy makers on what industry needs at any given time.

Need to identify and talk about the wins in the sector. Need to align interests between government and private sector. Government should focus on

jobs; the private sector should focus on exits. Build the angel ecosystem through exits There is an obsession about building Canadian Flagships to show success. Looking at jobs causes competitiveness. Need to communicate the value created when exits are happening. Government needs to

understand the value chain and who needs to track and compile the data to show success. Need the policy scenario/ Story to back this up.

12

Government thinks they need a well-defined sector to enact policies. If it’s not a sector, there are still groups that can be coordinated.

Key questions and takeaways: Better communication and coordination across industry and government at all levels is

required in order to be more effective and ensure alignment between all of the players.

Increased awareness of the success and value creation that clean tech brings to Canada would help provide additional attention and support to the sector.

Comments

The broken value chain is a barrier that needs to be addressed.

3. Recommendations

The third breakout session focused on specific recommendations that could address the areas of

improvement identified in the second session. Four thematic areas were suggested at the start of

the exercise.

Financial

1. Increase SDTC’s funding and expand its mandate to provide grants for scaling-up to

commercial operations. Cover more of the technology introduction expenses (e.g.

patenting) and extend the timeframes to give more long term funding certainty.

2. Create a loans granting program like SDTC’s NGBF without constraining the form of clean

technology the program applies to. This could be used to provide loan guarantees to

build the first of a kind installation with large capital requirements

bridge the gap for manufacturers going from market launch to economies of scale

extend data collection for new technology that proves bankability

demonstrate new technologies in other countries, other market sectors.

3. Increase allocation to venture capital and look at different models: a. Continue with V-Cap incentives to bring additional funds into the private sector and

structure to provide guaranteed returns to investors. b. Smaller pool of venture funds in Canada and smaller average fund size. c. Looking for low-cost high inflection market returns. d. EVOK model – have 2 separate funds – one for pure financial fund that supports a

separate early stage higher risk fund. Work to move deals between funds as risks are decreased.

4. In BC there is a 30% tax credit for accredited investor in clean tech. We need to have this standardized across the country.

5. Enact flow-through tax credits 6. Public grant process – reduce focus on technical and increase emphasis on business

evaluations that end up determining how the dollars are allocated. The technologies need to be evaluated based on the amount of business sense.

13

Policies and Incentives/non-financial support

1. Enable flow through tax credits (similar to those that are provided for oil and gas sectors) to be re-applied to the clean tech sector.

2. Use policy levers to create customers for clean technology in Canada, but avoid subsidies

that support non-competitive solutions. Reward the fast movers.

3. Immigration – Enable greater flow of talent – Create a fast track process for talent needed by start-up companies to scale up facilities and/or set up global supply chains. Incent those talents to immigrate (e.g. grant a tax holiday).

4. Build solid Boards that have the capacity to act as advisors 5. Need complementary and aligned programs between the Feds and Provinces with ideas of

shared risk and agreement on outcomes. 6. Improve the IP process and provide support to companies that may need help navigating

the IP landscape.

Information/process of getting solution providers through the system

1. Build on existing innovation ecosystem maps to provide greater transparency to all parties, and map out how we flow funding so that we can identify and address gaps

2. Promote success in Canada and do a better job at marketing successes. Communicate the story what we are good at.

3. Build on the US DOE SBIR program model1 – geared towards small business

System Collaboration

1. Reduce redundancy of funding organizations and system providers where there is overlap, and Incentivize collaboration.

2. Build on the open letter to the Prime Minister from the BC CleanTech CEO Alliance. Solicit

support from allied organizations in other provinces. Demonstrate widespread support.

3. Creation of a clean tech task force – form a collaborative relationship between government and industry

4. Business case and market has to drive the direction of the companies and tech sector in order to be successful.

5. Accelerate the deployment of clean tech research from academia / NRC etc.

6. Organize and fund a cohesive group to take on the regulators who are blocking change. Push

for pro-active legislation that will make Canada a leader in environmental protection and

mitigation of climate change. We should aim for being in the top three worldwide.

1 http://science.energy.gov/sbir/

14

4. Prioritization of Recommendations

In order to come out of the session with a prioritized list of recommendations, the workshop group

voted on the top recommendations discussed in the third breakout session. The recommendations

were categorized to reflect the area of the clean tech system where the recommendation applied.

The workshop attendees then conducted a dot-mocracy exercise where they were each given 6

stickers to place next to the recommendations that each participant viewed as their highest

priority. The results of this exercise are detailed in the appendix, however the high level results are

presented below.

The recommendations that emerged as the top priority from the group in order of descending

priority are tabulated in Table 1

Table 1: Top Recommendations (Dot-mocracy Tabulated Results)

Description of Recommendation Identified Next Steps Votes

Establish a loan guarantee program for earlier stage first commercialized projects in order to attract a critical mass for bankability

Work on establishing this type of policy 17

Recapitalize VCAP funding to 500 million with federal funds

Use existing framework and re-allocate budget

14

Enhance the flow through tax credit application to include clean tech projects and companies.

Change the current system to include this specific item

14

Increase/more funding to SDTC. Commit to funding over long periods of time (5-10 years)

Re-assess the criteria to determine what's covered by SDTC and re-purpose the next-gen bio-fuels funds to another sector

13

Creation of clean tech task force Form a collaborative relationship between government and industry to work on all of these recommendations

12

Create national support system for entrepreneurs on commercialization

Identify leaders in Clean Technology support & build support network

10

For public funds, reallocate emphasis from technical evaluations to include more emphasis on business evaluation (this determines where the dollars are allocated)

n/a 10

Human capital: create a subsidy support program for clean tech companies to hire specialized talent from abroad when needed; provide tax forgiveness to level currently lower wages

Explore options to bring talent in for tech immigration under a special mechanism; and make modification to tax system to include a new tax credit category

10

Establish a common language to technology and market readiness levels, e.g. another or a single encompassing "XRL" to drive maturation by commercial and technology readiness

Drive the maturation by the commercial readiness

8

15

The results indicate a willingness to identify and work to solve systematic challenges in the clean

tech sector that span across all categories of relevant organizations. There is a clear direction and

need for policy to align with incentivising additional private capital to be attracted to the clean tech

sector in Canada as well as recapitalize the government funding agencies such as SDTC. Overall

policy changes were seen as a high priority that would benefit from the development of a clean tech

task force to work in conjunction between industry and government to collaboratively explore the policy mechanisms available and recommended here, that will greatly contribute to the success of

the Canadian Clean Tech industry.

5. Summary

The results from all three breakout sessions demonstrate that there is a high degree of awareness

among the workshop attendees of the challenges and potential solutions. The voting results

identified a strong link to increased financing but also identified clear policy direction and system

support required. Coordination and collaboration were key principles that emerged as was the

view that improvements are needed now if Canadian companies are to be able to compete on the

global stage.

The voting resulted in a clean list of priorities but further discussion of these potential priorities

could help to identify actions that would help establish momentum for improvement. While most

of the recommendation will require action from multiple parties in order to be addressed, there are

opportunities where individuals and specific entities and begin making progress immediately on

some of these recommendations. As one step in further advancing the collaboration among all of

the clean tech sector players, acting on these recommendations in a coordinated fashion so as to not

duplicate efforts and work towards a shared objective would be tangible outcome and next step

from this workshop.

16

6. Appendix 1: Workshop Participants Name Organization

Tom Rand ARCTERN Ventures

Brent Lakeman Alberta Innovates - Tech Futures

Jonathan Rhone Axine Water Technologies

Mark Trevitt BDC

Elicia Maine Beedie School of Business, SFU

Tom Ogaranko Capital Roads Foundation

Juan Benitez Cenovus

Alfred Lam Chrysalix

Steve MacDonald Climate Change and Emissions Management Corporation (CCEMC)

Elizabeth Shirt CCEMC

Richard Adamson CMC Research Institutes

Evan Price CO2 Solutions

Andree Lise Mechot Cycle Capital Management

Richard Cloutier EcoFuel Accelerator

Denis Leclerc Écotech Quebec

Marty Reed Evok Innovations

Lynn Cote Export Development Canada

Emerson Csorba Gen Y Inc

Nathan Gilliland General Fusion

Dr. Alan Winter Genome BC

Suzanne Gill Genome BC

Darryl Wolanski Inventys

Michelle Scarborough Kensington Capital Partners

Jeff Reading Kinetica Ventures

Kevin Frankowski Kinetica Ventures

Jane Kearns MaRS

Andy Reynolds National Research Council

Julie Sunday Natural Resources Canada

Joseph Kuhach Nsolv Corporation

Gordon Skene Phytonix

Meera Nathwani-Crowe Shell Canada Limited

Carla Miner Sustainable Development Technology Canada

Heather Campbell Sustainable Development Technology Canada

Naina Sloan Western Economic Diversification Canada

Jeffrey Bell Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada

Suzanne Connell Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada

17

7. Appendix 2: Dotmocracy Results

Prioritized Recommendation Results

THEME/SUB-THEME NEXT STEPS VOTES

SYSTEM COORDINATION (TRL, Orgs, Nationally)

Creation of clean tech task force Form a collaborative relationship between government and industry

12

Establish a common language to technology and market readiness levels, e.g. another or a single encompassing "XRL" to drive maturation by commercial and technology readiness

Drive the maturation by the commercial readiness

8

Changing role of education to support future decision makers

n/a 2

Standardizing the tech readiness of a company Consult on definitions 1

Reduce redundancy of funding organizations and system providers

n/a 0

Incentive collaboration through requirements from funders

n/a 0

INFO/PROCESS TO GET THROUGH SYSTEM

Create national support system for entrepreneurs on commercialization

Identify leaders in Clean Technology support & build support network

10

Promote success of the sector and communicate the clean tech story in Canada

n/a 5

Define measure of success-> outcome Consult on best definition 2

Build on existing eco system mapping to provide clarity on organization involved in the system

n/a 2

FINANCING/INVESTMENT

loan guarantee program 4 earlier stage first commercialized projects, critical mass for bankability

n/a 17

Recapitalize VCAP funding to 500 million with federal funds

Use existing framework and re-allocate budget

14

Increase/more funding to SDTC. Commit to funding over long periods of time (5-10 years)

Other tweaks to what's covered by SDTC and re-purpose the next-gen bio-fuels

13

For public funds reallocate emphasis from technical evaluations to include more emphasis on business evaluation (this determines where the dollars are allocated)

n/a 10

18

Mapping out funding and requirements Review EcoTech Quebec Roadmap

4

Create a Canada-wide loan guarantee program, modeled after DOE in US

n/a 4

Open discussion around smarter financing along the chain

n/a 2

Identification of funding gaps & move to close Consultation on gaps and channel $s /resources

0

NON-FINANCIAL SUPPORT

Flow through tax credit application enhanced n/a 14

Human capital: create a subsidy support program for clean tech companies to hire specialized talent from abroad when needed; provide tax forgiveness to level currently lower wages

Explore options to bring talent in for tech immigration under a special mechanism; make modification to tax system to include a new tax credit category

10

Enable greater flow of talent specifically to business support position

n/a 2

Federal government needs to rebalance support to the value chain and address sharing of risk along chain

n/a 1

IP should be a discussion with some flexibility to align incentives

n/a 0

POLICIES

Costs associated with IP strategy are included in commercialization cost

SDTC proposes approach with ISED

5

Standardize IP policies to encourage progress to commercialization

Conduct best practices (domestic and international)

4

Define barriers to innovation that should be removed

Work with eco-systems to ID most important barriers

3

Create procurement friendly policies for the public/private sector

Look for examples/best practices 1

BUILD ON MOMENTUM/DO NOT DELAY

Align the momentum across jurisdictions and move on 3 or 4 top things & do them well

1. Pursue quick wins, 2. move ideas past lab bench into industrial process

5

$ for intermediates/connectors/ecosystem investment to move technologies, example commercialization programs and scale up expertise

WINN (WD), Genome BC 4

DEMAND PULL

Regulatory/Policy Levers to incent movement along the TRL & commercialization path

Leadership in initial policy 3

Carbon Price n/a 0

Economic Opportunity: change the story and show the business case for pursuing Clean Tech that makes Industry more competitive

n/a 0