Agenda Items in Blue

Document Sample
Agenda Items in Blue Powered By Docstoc
					           CALIFORNIA HYDROGEN HIGHWAY
                     ECONOMY TOPIC TEAM

                    Conference Call July 16, 2004
                      10:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon

                 Locations: Call In #:1-916-263-1364
                        Agenda Items in Blue
                         Action Items in Red

                               AGENDA


1. Roll Call (26 present)
         Ines Alder
         Peter Arias
         Elias Azrak
         Naveen Berry
         Corey Bock
         Woody Clark
         Mike Eaves
         Paul Eichenberger
         Fereidum Feizollahi
         Scott Fischler
         Bob Harrer
         Dora Hsu
         Stephen Irvin
         Ed Kiczek
         Tina King
         Patrick McCoy
          Brad Mondschein
          Tom Plenys
          Josh Richman
          Catherine Rips
          John Sakioka
          Chip Schroeder
          Paul Scott
          Stephen Torres
          Jonathan Weinert

2. Chip Update on new Team Tool Box
      a. Our team has two objectives: determine 1) What it’s going to cost,
         2) where its going to come from.
      b. For part 2, we have four different tool areas:
              i. Franchise concepts
             ii. Mandates
            iii. Cross-subsidies: reprogramming public funds from one
                 program to another
            iv. Direct/New Subsidies: new sources of public capital
             v. Other: new ideas of funding mechanisms
      c. Any suggestions on how to better categorize the funding
         mechanisms?
              i. Mike: we need to benchmark where we need to be in order
                 to attract private capital.
      d. Brad: what about loan guarantee programs (falls into new subsidy)
      e. Bob Harrer: what about VC activity, donations; how do they fit in?
         non-profit contributions? The word “Franchising” may be a bit too
         narrow (what about “private funds”)
      f. Chip: How do we succeed in creating a climate of defensible
         commercial position to be sufficient to attract private capital.
      g. Woody to Chip: define what you mean by the different concepts.
      h. Need something so that early participants get some level of
         protection against market failures. State becomes the issuer of
         franchises to early participants.
      i. Chip idea: Require stations that seek permit renewal need to install
         some h2 fueling capability.
              i. Use public policy requirement to cause private funds to be
                 expended to be able to defend their prior investments.
             ii. Bob: energy companies would be opposed to this idea.
      j. Let’s come up with ideas (specific examples) for each of these
         categories in a week’s time. Fill the toolbox. We need to present all
         ideas, including dissenting opinions (minority reports).
              i. Put your thoughts down, specific initiatives, send them to
                 Chip, he’ll put them in the boxes.


3. CalPERS call update:
      a. Purpose: we the need to pull in institutions with investor and
         finance perspective. William Chu will give perspective on where
         they see this market going, what kinds of tools they could suggest.
         They look at companies with good growth prospects. Look at
         prospects of technology innovation, invest in portfolios.
      b. Steven and Jessamyn to work with CalPERS staff to get specific
         example of market development in other industries. CalPERS will
         share expertise and connect the Team to it’s network of fund
         managers.
      c. CalPERS will also share examples of regulatory policies that have
         spurred market development and ones that have killed it.
      d. Once we come up with recommendations, CalPERS will critique it
         to see how it will affect the market. They’ll look at our
         recommendations through their lens.
      e. Woody: look at biotech model
             i. Flat panel display consortium info coming soon
      f. Need ideas on how to engage CALPERS

4. Policy Sub-group update
      a. Public funding options
               i. Mike: they are convening a joint policy subgroup
              ii. Will look at policy categories that will look at stimulating h2
                  production, encourage station construction, stimulate
                  market pull (vehicle side)
            iii. Two week time period to come up with their ideas. By
                  Tuesday 7/20, fill up bucket with specific items
             iv. Lots of reps from SocBen side, not so many from economy
                  team.
              v. Wendy James is tied in. Communications plan will be
                  guided by results from this team.
             vi. Subgroup formed to capture all the policy ideas/options
                  from people involved in all the teams.
            vii. Policies on DG: $4.5/kW subsidy and $2.5/kW for fuel cell
                  distributed generation. Looking to renew this subsidy.
           viii. Tina suggestion: coordinate with DOE H2 technologies and
                  infrastructure program.
            ix. Woody: need to look at USDOD, DOEducation, DOT, and
                DOLabor; these are the non-obvious players in this that need
                to be tied in.
             x. Ed Stevenson: Solar integrated technologies: he knows of a
                program up for renewal or expansion. Mike will read and
                send readers digest summary of report. If anyone has
                knowledge of any of these programs?, send them to Mike.

5. Steve and Jessamyn Private Financing Update
      a. Created slideshow of what worked for EU wind industry, what
          didn’t?
      b. Next step: take this knowledge and try to make a recommendation
          for H2 highway. Ex. Guaranteed price mechanism.
      c. Woody: has anything been done on the Solar industry in the EU?
          Check with Eurorpean Hydrogen Association.
      d. Paul: compare effectiveness of European methods with what has
          been done in the states. Similar incentives exist in the solar
          industry. Production tax credits.

6. Update from Jonathan Weinert – Economic Station Modeling
     a. In the process of contacting industry (equipment suppliers and
        station builders) regarding the costs of hydrogen stations and
        equipment. So far, I’ve contacted
              i. Bob Harrer is working on getting the internal Chevron
                 Texaco Energy Station report and getting other data to
                 Jonathan.
             ii. Stuart is working on pulling data together
            iii. Stephen Torres (FCE) has provided data on their fuel cell
                 costs
     b. All: Look through CHREC spreadsheet (emailed out to group) to
        verify data, look for suspect data, add data.
     c. Will be gathering data over the next two weeks.
     d. H2A analysis- Steve Lasher
              i. Group sponsored by DOE, group of researchers, reps from
                 national labs.
                    1. Delivery Team
                    2. Forecourt team: On-site production of hydrogen
                    3. Centralized Production Team
                    4. Assumptions are well vetted by industry.
                    5. This does not do transition analysis
                    6. Does base case/reference case to compare (100kg/day
                        and 1500 kg/day station).
                    7. Woody would like to know assumptions.
                 8. Marianne Mintz: Discounted cash flow rate of
                     analysis. An engine for calculating the costs of
                     making hydrogen from any technology. SMR, future
                     NGref, nuclear, electrolysis, other…
                 9. It’s main value is it provides a methodology for
                     calculating the costs of hydrogen
                 10. Looks at moderate production volume (100-500
                     units/yr)
                 11. Look at NHA presentation for assumptions from
                     model.
                 12. Stefan Unnasch to work with Jonathan on this model.
      e. NREL study briefing on stationary economics

7. CHBC Survey – Elias Azrak
     a. They will be convening soon to discuss at a working group meeting
        they’re having.
     b. Elias will put Jonathan directly in touch with members willing to
        talk about costs.
     c. Survey will go out Wednesday 7/21

8. Other
       a. Economy Team Website will soon be active, agendas and meeting
          minutes will now be posted
9. Update on Cost/benefits Team: health care costs of petroleum uses. Send
    comments on paper back to Tom (Plenys?). Cory Bock and Naveen, could
    you forward info on externalities related to petroleum uses? They may
    have some info on alt fuels that they could forward. Feriduhn may have
    some info
       a. Rupert, Gustavo, Dan, Mike: how are we going to use this info,
          how it will be plugged into the presentation? Do we want to map
          this with cost data.
       b. Woody: follow up with LBNL, CPUC has also done work on Life
          cycle analysis,
       c. Oak Ridge NL, Pace University.
       d. Look at GAO report that talks about $120/barrel oil. GAO report is
          a couple years old.
       e. Bob Harrer: how will quantitative information be used?
       f. Info will be coordinated with SocBen Team.
10. How do we loop the automakers in on this discussion. How do we
    support the vehicle side of the equation?
       a. Convene group call to talk about vehicle issues.
       b. How should we move forward on this
  i. Plug in CaFCP, they have recommendations for the
     H2Highways team.
 ii. We can’t just look at FCVs, need to include ICE stakeholders.
     Quantum
iii. Paul will take lead on putting subgroup together.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:7/27/2012
language:
pages:6