1. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Portfolio Diversification and the Value
of Solar Thermal with Storage
The George Washington University
Solar Institute
April 12, 2012

2. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
 Geographically diverse portfolio of more than
3,000 MW of CSP projects
 Three lead projects (310 MW) – Power Purchase
Agreements with $5.5 billion in projected revenues
 Late stage projects represent more than 600 MW
under permitting
 25 sites and more than 150,000 acres under
control
 Expanded into Photovoltaic activities in early
2009 development pipeline of more than 1,500
MW
 Primarily in the 5MW to 20 MW capacity proposed
over 40 different sites across the US
 Several large scale PV projects in the 50 MW to
200MW capacity range
 Two 75MW projects awarded to SolarReserve in
South Africa in December of 2011
SolarReserve – CSP and PV Solar Projects

3. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
SolarReserve’s Global Reach

4. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
SolarReserve CSP Solar Energy Plants
640 foot tall tower
More than 10,000 heliostats Project Rendering

5. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
 Location: Tonopah, Nevada
 Technology: Concentrated
Solar Power with Thermal
Energy Storage
 Size: 110 MW
 Power Contract: NV Energy
 Energy Production: 500,000
MW hours annually
 Site: ~ 1,600 acres
 Transmission: 9.5 miles
 Fuel: Sunlight
Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project

6. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Firm, Non-Intermittent Renewable Energy
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00
Percent
Load
Time of Day
Decoupling of power generation and energy collection provides stable
and reliable power output
Trough
PV
Molten Salt Power Tower
(8 Hours Generation Profile)
Molten Salt Power Tower
(16 Hours Generation
Profile)

7. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
 CSP with molten salt storage contributes value in ways that are unrecognized
in most renewable procurement processes
CSP with Storage’s Unrecognized Value
Less environmental impact and societal
infrastructure cost
High capacity factor leads to higher utilization of
transmission lines
Hedge vs. price volatility in energy and ancillaries
Known cost of energy and ancillary services
Enables higher penetration of PV, protecting
against ramping constraints
Tolerant to curtailment
Can change delivery profile mid-life to adjust to
new market conditions
Dispatch flexibility
More long-term operational jobs than PV or wind
Jobs
Provides VARs, inertia, governor response, etc.
Uncompensated benefits of a steam turbine
Avoids long-term dependency on fossil fuels and
related emissions
Requires no fossil fuel backup due to high capacity
value and reliability
More responsive to the grid’s price signals,
delivering greater value to the ratepayer
Can make real-time dispatch decisions

8. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
 Unlike wind and photovoltaics, provides firm, non-intermittent supply power
without the use of fossil fuels
 Can replace conventional dispatchable power supply such as coal, natural gas
and nuclear
 Allows power delivery profile to be tailored to exactly meet utility requirements
 Provides “more valuable” electricity
 Example: PG&E (California) “super peak” period is from 1PM to 8PM
 24 hour supply available
 Overall results in more efficient, effective and reliable power supply
 Inherent thermal energy storage allows for power on demand, even after
dark
 Typically 10 to 16 hours of storage per project depending on utility
requirements
 Substantial increase in efficiency and capacity factors – 50% to 80% capacity
factors as compared to PV or wind which typically operates at 25% to 40%.
Advantages of CSP Technology with Storage

9. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
 Inherent storage (no
efficiency loss)
 Dispatchable, on-demand
generation
 No natural gas required for
operations or steam
consistency
 Predictable and efficient
steam cycle
 Dry cooling can be
implemented efficiently
 Low-pressure salt system
Molten Salt vs. Direct Steam and Trough
 No inherent energy storage
 Significant efficiency loss
for bolt-on storage
 Intermittent generator
during transient weather
 Natural gas required to
“prop up” system – issues
of gas cost, emissions,
availability of nearby
pipeline supply
 Receiver must handle
water/steam phase change
 High pressure system
throughout
 No inherent energy
storage
 Significant efficiency loss
for bolt-on storage
 Intermittent generator
 Natural gas required for
operations – issues of
gas cost, emissions,
availability of nearby
pipeline supply
 Smaller temperature
‘capture range’ with
Therminol
 Limited economies of
scale in core collector
geometry
Molten Salt Tower Direct Steam Tower Solar Trough
Best-in-class design with
significant
cost/performance upside
Benefits of central tower
but hobbled by steam
system limitations
Mature technology but
highest cost with limited
improvement upside

10. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
 National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates CSP with storage will
deliver a value of 1.6 - 4.0 ¢ / kWh over other solar generation in Western
US
Estimated Value of Storage
 Value is higher on
smaller grids with
higher sensitivity to
intermittency, higher
natural gas prices,
higher renewable
penetration, etc.
 High-value power
resource, eliminating
need for conventional
power resources

11. Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Contact Information
www.solarreserve.com
Joel M. Link
Vice President of Development
joel.link@solarreserve.com
Corporate Headquarters:
2425 Olympic Blvd.
Suite 500 East
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Phone: (310) 315-2200
Toll-Free: (866) 622-2778
Fax: (310) 315-2201
European Headquarters
(UK):
Phone: +44 (0)1242 261 200
Fax: +44 (0)1242 261 900