ENABLING THE HYDROGEN ECONOMY

Presenter: Carl Hensman Ph.D. (chensman@asemblon.com)

VP Technology Development

Asemblon Inc.15340 NE 92nd Street, Suite BRedmond, WA 98052-3521

t/ 425.558.5100

Asemblon

Private Equity funded Science and Technology Company in Redmond, Washington

Business Model – Licensing

Energy Transmission and Distribution (LLNL)

Ref: https://eed.llnl.gov/flow/

Forecasted

?

The Opportunity

Provide hydrogen as a cost effective fuel source, by allowing safe and inexpensive storage and transport

Reduce dependence on foreign oil Make maximum use of all energy sources by

aligning the supply with the demand Dramatically reduce carbon emissions and

particulates resulting from hydrocarbon combustion Make use of the current fueling infrastructure Economically retrofit vehicles currently on the road

for hydrogen use Provide hydrogen for both mobile and static energy

systems

HYDRNOL Carrier

Unique Qualities Simple organic molecule Liquid over a wide temperature

range Stored and transported at normal

temperature and pressure Uses current fueling

infrastructure Safe as gasoline or diesel Exceeds DOE goals Enables renewable energy Releases Hydrogen only when

needed for consumption

Applications Transportation

▪ Co-Combustion▪ Hydrogen ICE & Fuel Cell▪ Trains, Ships▪ Aerospace

DOD, DOE Power Generation Power Peaking Commercial & Residential Petrochemical and Other Industries

HYDRNOL – Molecular Concept

HYDRNOLHydrogen to use

Spent HYDRNOL

Dehydrogenation Catalyst Surface

Hydrogenation Catalyst Surface

Hydrogen from source

HYDRNOL

Asemblon – Hydrogen Technical Roadmap

Concept Proof

•Demonstration of the chemistry that releases H2

•Demonstration of the chemistry that adds H2 back to the carrier

•Demonstration of production of carrier

•Combination of all of the above

Fundamental Operating

Parameters•Discovery of optimal fuels

•Discovery of catalyst families

•Determination of energy requirements

Scale-up to Alpha reactor

•Optimization of catalyst form

•Design and development of best reactor design

•Low fidelity system design

•Manual control system

Development of Beta reactor

•High fidelity system design and fabrication

•Autonomous operation

•Start/stop cycle proof

•Full balance of plant and control integration

Integration of beta reactor to prototype

•Fuel cell based•ICE based•Vehicle•Static

Demonstration of

prototype

2008/20092009/2010

2010/2011

Vehicle Implementation

Deliver HYDRNOL™ to Service Stations

Produce virgin HYDRNOL™

HYDRNOL™ delivered to vehicle

Spent HYDRNOL™ re-hydrogenated with hydrogen

source and added back into use

circuit

Standard Gasoline Tanker c.f. Specialized Cryo/compressed Tanker

HYDRNOL station is around 1/10 of cost of cryo-compressed station $40 MM c.f. $400 MM for California

Recycling ~100 times

A method is needed to store the wind production until required

Power Shifting

DOE Targets – Comparison with Other Storage

HYDRNOL – N108HYDRNOL – N108

2010 Target

2015 Target

Ultimate TargetHYDRNOL – N67

H2 Storage Comparison

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500

50

100

150

200

250

300

HYDRNOL-S47HYDRNOL-N67HYDRNOL-N108HYDRNOL-N116CryoComp

Tank Volume (US Gal)

Driv

ing

Dis

tanc

e (m

iles)

5000 psi 10000 psi Cryo HYDRNOL0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

% H

2 w

/w

Gravimetric Percentage N67

5000 psi 10000 psi Cryo HYDRNOL0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Discharge

Recharge

Ener

gy (k

J/m

ol H

2)

Fundamental Energy Requirements N67

Expected Schedule – Research to Scale-up

2008 2009 2010 20114

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Gra

vim

etri

c Pe

rcen

tage

(% w

/w H

2)

DOE 2010 Target

DOE 2015 Target

DOE ‘Ultimate’ Target

S47

N67

N108N116

Demonstration Partners

Automobile Clemson University – International Center for Automotive

Research (18-24 months, H2ICE)

▪ BMW, Mazda PACCAR/Kenworth (18-24 months, 32 KW Fuel Cell)

Static Basin Electric/DOE (18-24 months, H2ICE co-combustion)

▪ Wind to hydrogen▪ Footprint for HYDRNOL station▪ Co-Combustion vehicles

Small engines (12-18 months, small consumer) NREL/Clemson University – South Carolina Institute for

Energy Studies

HYDRNOL Advantage

Cost to move hydrogen is cheaper than cryo-comp or compressed hydrogen Conventional tube tanker and equipment

A HYDRNOL based hydrogen fueling station would be 1/10th of the cost of a current hydrogen fueling station Lower CapEx and lower handling issues Akin to E85 Enables adoption due to low cost retro-fit kits and fuel availability

Faster adoption results in more rapid scale-up of tax subsidies to further fund renewable efforts Current models are anchored in the distributed conversion of natural

gas to hydrogen HYDRNOL can reduce costs through centralized processing

Economics of HYDRNOL Use - Vehicles

Per kg H2

Steam reformed hydrogen from methane $ 1.00Delivery cost of recycled HYDRNOL $ 0.14Spent HYDRNOL cost $ 0.04Hydrogenation cost $ 0.37Taxes $ 0.70Royalty $ 0.10Retailer Profit $ 0.04

Total retail cost at the pump in HYDRNOL form

$ 2.35

HYDRNOL = 4.4 gallons/kg H2On an energy basis 1 kg H2 = 1 gallon gasoline BFN-Asemblon Model 09/04/09

Technical Implementation

Partnership Funding

Q4Q3

1st commercial install. ground

breakP.R. plan launched

Funding mechanisms in place for rollout

Q2

Pilots demonstratedDemonstration

ongoing

Partner commitmentOEM manu.

engaged

Q1

P.R. strategy developed

Q4

Static demoAutomotive demo

Pilot equipment installed

$40 mm round closed

Q3

All OEM manufacturers/ distributers in

position

Q2 Pilot OEM ordered

Commercial partners

subcontracted for pilots

Q1

Operating beta reactor

$5 mm Gov’t Pilots

Q4

Operating alpha reactor

Comm. part. contactedMilestone

notification

Q3Q2

Adoption analysis complete

Multiple state pilots defined

Q1

Reactor design and cat. screening

contracted

Technical teaming ID

Political outreach

$6.5 mm round closed

Year

3Ye

ar 1

Year

2

HYDRNOL Timeline: Tier 1 – Scale-Up

7-year Financial Forecast

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $(200,000,000.00)

$-

$200,000,000.00

$400,000,000.00

$600,000,000.00

$800,000,000.00

$1,000,000,000.00

$1,200,000,000.00

$1,400,000,000.00

$1,600,000,000.00

$1,800,000,000.00 RevenueEBITDA

Offering Terms

Series C Preferred - $5,000,000 Combined $21,000,000 Pre $2.00 per share 2,500,000 shares Total Share outstanding post offering

▪ 13,004,275 Fully diluted Purchases 19.22% of Company $2,900,000 First Close Done $390,000 Received for Second Close $1.5 M available oversubscription Available for placement $3,210,000 M Planned Close Oct-‘09