 Good afternoon, everyone. We'll get this panel started now. In this session, we're going to be looking at water technologies, hydropower, ocean power, and also looking at the whole nexus between energy and water, which is indeed a very, very powerful one and one that we all need to think about much more seriously because of the very, very important and tight connections. And our first speaker up today is Matt Nocella, who is the Assistant Manager for Strategic Communications with NHA, the National Hydropower Association. Matt? Thank you very much, Carol. Good afternoon, everyone. I just wanted to take the time to thank ESI for hosting the policy forum and particularly for hosting the live webcast. We should all wave hello to my mother, who is watching from home right now. She's very excited. So thank you again. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, my name is Matt Nocella. I am the Assistant Manager for Strategic Communications at the National Hydropower Association. We are a national trade association of over 200 members that represents the diverse North American hydropower industry, and that's made up of all forms of hydropower, large, small, new marine hydroponetics, as well as pump storage and conduit applications. For over a century now, hydropower has played a vital role in the nation's renewable electricity portfolio. Large projects fueled our war effort during World War II and helped power us through the Great Depression. Today, hydropower makes up about 7% of overall generation and over 60% of the nation's renewable electricity portfolio, and that provides 30 million Americans with access to reliable, clean, low-cost energy on a daily basis. The hydropower fleet is divided amongst the federal and non-federal owners, so the Army Corps of Engineers as well as the Bureau of Reclamation are the largest owners of hydropower in the United States, and they make up about half of that capacity ownership. The other half is owned by the non-federal entities that are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and though many people think large dams, large power projects, when they think about hydropower, about 70% of what's regulated by FERC is 30 megawatts or under. Now, hydropower brings numerous benefits to the electricity grid, to its consumers and to businesses across the country. First of all, hydropower is a reliable energy resource. As I previously stated, it provides 30 million American homes with electricity every day, and because these facilities are particularly good at going quickly from zero to maximum output, they're able to follow-load and provide reliability to the electricity grid. Pump storage hydropower, which involves pumping water up into an upper reservoir, provides 99% of the energy storage in the United States of grid-scale storage. So that is another thing that provides reliability to electric grid as well as helps integrate variable energy resources. Second, hydropower is an affordable, low-cost energy resource. The products have long life spans. They have low operations and maintenance costs, and they, like many renewables, have zero fuel costs. Estimates have put the average levelized cost of electricity for conventional hydropower anywhere from 3 to 5 cents per kilowatt hour. And of course, hydropower is a clean renewable resource. Of course, in 2011 alone, it helped us avoid 225 million metric tons of CO2 emissions, which is the equivalent of removing 42 million passenger cars off the road. Apart from the energy and environmental benefits, there are tremendous economic and employment benefits. The industry employs 300,000 American workers today and supports a supply chain of over 2,500 companies across the country. And that's in areas that aren't traditionally associated with renewable energy, such as the Rust Belt in the south. Now that is a lot about hydropower as it stands now. We also have a huge opportunity to expand the benefits of hydropower to millions more Americans, but policy changes will need to be enacted in order to realize that untapped potential. Our off-sighted report is the Navigant Report, and this was done back in 2010, and it identified about 60,000 megawatts of hydropower capacity that could be added. And most of that was through developing at non-powered dams, building on existing infrastructure and low-impact projects, including pump storage, as well as some of the new marine tidal and hydrokinetic projects. So the number that usually shocks people with hydropowers is that we have 80,000 dams in the United States, and only 3% of those generate electricity. So back in 2012, the Department of Energy identified that we could add about 12,000 megawatts of capacity at the nation's existing 54,000 non-powered dams. Two-thirds of that capacity, so about 8,000 megawatts, could be built just at the top 100 sites. So by building at 100 of these non-powered dams, we could be powering millions of American homes with clean, affordable electricity. There's also additional capacity that's been identified by the Bureau of Reclamation at their non-powered dams and conduits. Again, another 1.6 million megawatt hours of annual generation, which is about 140,000 American homes. Now, there's definitely interest from the developers to pursue these types of projects right now at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in their queue. That's the sum of all the products that are up for licensing, have permits applied for, or have been granted preliminary permits to explore projects. There's 70,000 megawatts that developers are exploring in some form or another at FERC. Now it'd be great if we could build all that. I don't think very many people would say that all that would necessarily be built, but there are challenges to the development of hydropower in the United States, regulatory, financial, and research and development. So we have the largest challenge to hydropower developers in the United States is the regulatory structure. It's the only renewable that's regulated at the federal level, except for wind and solar that's being built on public lands. They face a regulatory process that could take up to and beyond five years' time. And that's for all projects, regardless, except for some of that go through an exemption process or exempt from FERC licensing. And this involves dozens of federal and state agencies, as well as local stakeholders. The other thing, or actually, NHA has been working vigorously on to address the regulatory challenges. We have two bills that have actually passed out of the House of Representatives, one which would look at doing a two-year licensing process for building projects like adding power capacity to the non-powered dams in the United States and building some of the small projects, increasing the exemption from FERC licensing from 5 megawatts to 10 megawatts. That passed out of the House of Representatives unanimously twice so far, and the Senate Energy Committee has passed that out of their committee unanimously as well. The other bill that we're working on is one that would help build on the Bureau of Acclamations non-powered conduits. It would authorize those capacity additions that also passed out of the House nearly unanimously and is at the same stage in the Senate. It's passed out of the Energy Committee. So now we have two bills that are primed and ready to go to help us tap some of that untapped potential if the Senate would just take those two bills up. The other challenge that hydropower faces is though it is affordable over the long lifespan of the project, the very capital-intensive upfront, and the current political climate around incentives that help leverage private investment and make developers able to look at different projects and upgrading their projects has been extremely uncertain. The PTC was extended for another year, and the terms of that were changed just a little bit, but as I mentioned, the regulatory process for hydropowers five-plus years, and a one or two-year extension of a production tax credit doesn't necessarily work out in a developer's mind when they're thinking, I have five years, and that's not even guaranteeing that I'm going to get a license for this project. And then the final barrier that we've seen is particularly with the newer technologies. Some of the smaller technologies are not as cost-effective. Research and development, of course, is one of the greatest things that we can be doing there to help bring down the cost and make them more competitive with traditional resources. Energy's water power program over the past few years has seen unstable funding. It's gone from 10 million, I think, in 2008 up to 50, back down to 30. We're actually one of the few energy resources where the continuing resolution process has been kinder to us than regular order, than passing a budget by regular order because we've seen a more stable research and development funding over at DOE. And we were very pleased to see that the President has asked for a level funding for this year in his budget request and also asked for a permanent extension of the production tax credit as part of his budget request. So those are the opportunities, the challenges, and the policies that NHA is working on. So thank you for your time, and I'll look forward to your questions at the end of the panel. Thanks, Matt. And we'll now turn to our Canadian colleague, to Jacob Irving, who is the President of the Canadian Hydropower Association. Thank you very much, Carol, and Matt's mom, this guy really knows what he's talking about. And thanks to all of you for the invitation to come speak. I represent the Canadian Hydropower Generators and Developers, sort of the Canadian version of the NHA, the National Hydropower Association. Our two associations work together tirelessly on the promotion of hydropower within our own countries but also as a bit of a North American concept. Canada and the United States are already linked. You can come visit our booth later and I'll give you one of these maps, but I always like to say I try to boil down my key messages to two pages, and I try to make them pictures as much as possible. You can come by and pick this up, but I mean quickly, I mean we've got a map that demonstrates how Canada and the United States are interconnected. Our grids are actually more North-South than they are East-West on a continental basis, so it means we're already sending you electricity. You're already sending us electricity. We've got a good long story passed in supporting each other. On our side, however, we generally send you a little bit more electricity than you send us, but that's sort of the general story of the relationship between our two countries. We have large natural resources. We have the world's second largest land mass. The third largest amount of surface water on the planet. And we live next door to a neighbor who has 10 times our population. We have about 35 million people across our country. You guys have about 350. The population, our entire population of our second largest land mass is about the same as that of California. So we've got a lot of land. We have a lot of resources, not as many people. You folks have one of the most sophisticated marketplaces the world has ever known. And our relationship throughout the history of both of our countries has been one of mutual benefit. Where we send you resources, and in many cases, you manufacture and send back to us. And Hydropower story isn't much different. In fact, for every dollar that an American will spend on Canadian energy, Canadians, we buy back 91 cents in finished goods from the United States. Now, every so often I run into somebody who's not entirely sophisticated, and they'll say, what happened to the other nine cents? My answer is, well, you get the power to power yourselves, to go get other customers as well, and you also get a loyal 91-cent customer in return. So it really is to the mutual benefit of both our countries that we maximize each other's resources. And our message on Hydropower is found on the other side of the map, which you'll see as well. But in this one, we quickly just tried to tell everyone that Canada is large in hydropower development. We have 74,000 megawatts of installed capacity. We are the third largest generator in the world. And as developed as we are, we can still grow our hydropower capacity in Canada. In fact, we can more than double our installed capacity. So we like to think that's a pretty good news message, that the world's third largest hydropower generator can more than double its installed capacity. And much of that would be for our own needs, but much of that could be to also help underwrite the U.S.'s desire to develop a cleaner, more renewable electricity system. And on both sides of the border, we are able to use hydropower to enable new renewables, such as wind and solar. We do that in Canada, and we also actually do that in the United States. And there's a very good story to look into with Minnesota Power and Manitoba in the middle of our continent, where that state and our province have come together with a very forward-looking plan which is meant to develop wind on the U.S. side and also water on the Canadian side and have the two ratchet each other up and actually have clean renewable, enabling clean renewable on both sides of the border. And we think that with our large, undeveloped hydropower potential, that that's the thing that we can offer to the United States, and the strategic interest of the U.S. It's, again, to our mutual benefit. And one of the differences, and Matt's talking about the large undeveloped potential in the U.S., which is significant. I mean, the U.S. has the third-largest installed capacity and is talking about almost doubling. I mean, that's amazing and significant. You add Canadian hydropower to that. Now, we can really do something on a continental level in terms of cleaning up our overall generation system when the two are partnered. But the overall development needs to happen in a manner that's thought out and that is primarily based on leveraging the renewables together. If you can have Ikaoff and say that water power and wind power and solar power, they go together like peanut butter and chocolate. I mean, it's the best way. When you have clean renewable, enabling clean renewable, then you're really getting somewhere and you're actually reversing the way things were done in the past. And from our side, on the Canadian perspective, we have our large undeveloped storage capacity, which is somewhat different from the U.S. And that is one of the key differences in our undeveloped potential. We are talking about new projects. We're talking about new dams. We're talking about new run-of-river and new storage. And while those often have local ecological environmental issues that must be addressed and must be dealt with and that are addressed and dealt with in our regulatory process in Canada, one of the key features is that it's precisely that storage capacity that really helps invigorate the new renewables, the wind and solar. And that's something that Canada can bring to the mix. But I think it should be of increased interest to both countries. So I think, you know, together, again, we're stronger than we are apart. When we add our numbers together, we are our two countries with our hydro power. On a North American basis, we eliminate 350 million tons of CO2 per year. The undeveloped potential, you take the 100 in the U.S. and the 163 in Canada. It's over 250,000 megawatts of clean renewable electricity. And we've looked at it from a Canadian perspective in terms of, you know, dreaming a little bit and what could you do with that kind of power? And one of the things that we did is we actually ran it through an electric vehicle scenario and we have an electric vehicle study that can be shared. But what we did is we said, well, if you took undeveloped hydro power and you ran it through electric vehicles, what would it mean? And the quick idea is that if you took the light-duty vehicle fleet in North America and say you can wave a magic wand and all of a sudden they were all plug-in hybrid electrics, would you have enough clean renewable electricity to power such a fleet? And what we found is that if you took just half of our undeveloped hydro power potential in Canada, half of that 163,000, and if you were able to dedicate it to electrifying electric vehicles, I know that it's quite theoretical and it's not as time like to do, but if you did that, what would the result be? And in Canada, you'd be able to electrify the entire Canadian light-duty vehicle fleet quite easily and you'd be able to electrify about 25% of the U.S. fleet here if you're able to start looking at doing things that way. And all that is meant to do is, I think to give us hope and courage that we have large, undeveloped clean renewable electricity to help transform our systems. And when we do it together, there's nothing we can't do. Thank you for the opportunity. Great examples. And actually the Manitoba Hydro Minnesota Power story we have told at a congressional briefing because we think that it is such a good illustration of how it can benefit the economy, energy, everything, environment all at the same time. And I think it's, as Matt and Jacob have talked to, it's really important for us to see this huge opportunity as we think about power and how we're talking about how it can also look at other sectors in terms of transport. And we need to always think holistically and that's really exciting. So we'll now turn to Carolyn Elephant who is the co-founder and general counsel of the Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition because there are lots of water power technologies. Good afternoon. I'm Carolyn Elephant wearing my Ocean Energy Blue. I am general counsel of the Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition. It was founded in 2005 and it is the National Trade Association for the Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Sector. Now what Marine and Hydrokinetic, or MHK as we call it, encompasses is power generated from wave, from current, from tidal, from offshore wind, also from change in thermal gradient, really any power that's produced from free-flowing unimpounded water. Our coalition, since it was founded in 2005, has delivered over $100 million in appropriations to the Marine Hydrokinetic Technology. We have also participated in rule makings because we sort of had to create a system, a regulatory process from the ground up when MHK came on the scene and really started to become, move towards commercialization. There wasn't a regulatory system in place and one of the policy programs that our group worked on was creating this regulatory system. So 2012 was a very exciting year. As I said, 2012 was the year we sort of went over the $100 million mark in terms of total appropriations. But what was also even more exciting is it's the first year that a tidal project was connected to the grid. That was in September 2012. It was the ocean renewable power company that is now connected into the grid in Maine generating free-flowing tidal power that is being transmitted to, throughout Maine. It was even more exciting and not to use a bad pun, it created an additional stream of revenue through the sale of renewable energy credits. Many of you may have heard about this term REC or Renewable Energy Credits today. Those are basically the environmental attributes associated with renewable power generation. And so when you have a renewable project, you're selling the power on the one hand, but you're selling these environmental attributes so that utilities can comply with renewable portfolio standards in states. And so it's an exciting program because it creates that added inflow of revenue. In addition to the ORPC project, three other projects were also licensed by FERC and we're waiting for those pilot projects to move ahead. So anyway, so where is our industry going moving forward? OREC is continuing to lobby for funding for our industry. We're building a test center where projects can come and where their technologies can be tested in real water conditions. The industry is also looking towards broadening our view of applications. And originally the concept for marine hydrokinetics was like the concept for most other renewables, utility scale projects. That's something that's still on the horizon but is going to take us a while to get there because our companies are still getting projects in the water. But in addition to utility scale, MHK projects can serve a variety of other uses. One phrase or one topic you've probably heard about a lot today, microgrids. MHK projects can serve microgrids, can help small communities essentially operate off the grid in remote locations like Hawaii and Alaska and other places where there's a free flowing source of water. MHK, like traditional hydropower, can serve as backup power and also can serve as backup power because even though it's intermittent, it's very predictable. You can predict it almost to the minute and so as a result, it can be sold, it can be produced at those time periods to make up a difference for when power isn't available. One of the regulatory policies at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is to set market rates, to set competitive rates for different types of power for ancillary power and for backup power and so that's a potential source of revenue for this industry and potentially at higher rates than it might command for just producing utility scale. Renewable energy is also, MHK is also producing backup power. One of some of our member companies that are testing projects that aren't connected to the grid are powering batteries. There's an underwater wave device that's collecting data. It's powered by waves. So it's collecting data on the oceans and powered by waves. I mean, how holistic is that? There are many, many other of those types of exciting dual applications in terms of hybrids. MHK projects can power desalinization plants, aquaculture facilities. And so this is a whole new range of applications that our industry is looking at that can help these projects along the way. So it can make use of them while they're small and as the technology comes into, it becomes more mature, it can help them build out to the utility scale. So what are some of the problems that we're facing? There are a few. I mean, there's perpetually a funding crisis. Everybody has that same issue. We have also been struggling with the regulatory regime in the FERC licenses that issued for these projects that were authorized the cost for the permitting process. Not building the license, just permitting $2.5 million. That's just insane. And in the early years, these tiny projects are generating maybe $100,000, $200,000 in power. There's a disparity there. Another issue that's very unique to MHK is we have not been able to take advantage of a lot of the wonderful benefits that the Obama administration has made available because there's a mismatch between regulation on one hand and benefits on the other. We have to be able to so in terms of the ARRE and 1603 benefits, those were for projects that were going ahead in the water. Our member companies were mired in the permitting process. Commercialization was years away at these benefits. We're going to be short-lived. So one of the things that we are going to be focusing on moving forward is trying to figure out a way that we can align tax benefits like investment tax credit, the accelerated depreciation tax benefits and even potential funding sources, how we can align those with the regulatory process so that our companies can actually take advantage of the money that's on the table. We invite you to learn more about MHK technology at our table. We also have blue cupcakes with fish on them. They're not real fish. They didn't go through our turbines. So although they are red, which could be a bad sign, so we invite you to have a snack at our table. Take a look at some of the materials that we have. We've got some infographics and some interesting statistics about the technologies as well as pictures of all of them. And we hope that you will come there and learn more about our organization or visit our website at oceanrenewable.com. Thanks very much. I look forward to seeing you at the rest of this conference. And thank you for having us. And rounding out our panel this afternoon is Tom Horner, of Water Management, Inc. Thank you, Carol. Thanks to all the great folks that have helped put this show on. I think the thing that is always amazing to me is how many smart people there are in the renewable field. And just in the hydro area, the advances they've made where with all the amount of generation in the hydro field right now and all the advances they're basically making up 50% of the power that we need to pump water and sewer around the country. So just water is a very heavy substance. That's why it's good at producing power. But when you want water in a lot of other areas of the country, you need to pump it. You need to pump the sewage. So what we have is a situation where 15% to 16% of our total electric use right now is related to pumping water and wastewater and storm water around the country. It's a lot higher percentage than we think. So one water, integrated water management, storm water, rain water, 15, 20 years from now, it's just going to be one water. We have the technology to treat it. It's how much it costs. But I think fundamentally what it comes down to is if we look out the next 20 to 25 years, how are we going to treat the commons? And when I talk about the commons, I'm talking about our streams, our water sources, our water and sewer authorities. I think that these are shared assets that really make up the core of what our society is. And I think the water industry, like other components of the common, it's got to be operated a little bit more sustainably, efficiently, wisely. I think it's one of the best kind of examples of a hybrid commons where you have government and the private sector that are working together to deliver a very high quality product. Currently the fees that are paid for water, sewer, storm water are quite a bit lower than what they need to be. We had a lot of credits and direct funding that started with the water authorities and the amount of money being invested now as you've all heard from the different civil engineering reports isn't quite what we need to keep our infrastructure in place. So in 25 years it's going to be one authority. I think people are just starting it's hitting them now that rain water, wow it comes down fast sometimes like it has this week but it's a precious commodity, it's pure. But once it hits the ground and starts running off now it's storm water and we're paying a ridiculous amount of money to treat it. Well there's a disconnect here because it was all these three different silos. There were the guys that provide water. There's the sewer guys and there's the storm water guys. Well they're all starting to talk in the last few years and so if you harvest the rain or put in rain gardens or do low impact development like they're doing in Philly and DC and a lot of East Coast cities you're replacing three to five times as much infrastructure that you'd need to build to take care of the same situation. So we got smart people that are starting to talk a little bit more. Some of the challenges we're going to see in the next 15 to 25 years is we've gotten very good at measuring things in parts per billion. 15, 20 years ago part per million was a lot for us civil engineers and now we have to worry about the pharmaceuticals and herbicides and some of these things in the part per billion range. The cost to treat water will continue to increase. We'll see a lot more two pipe systems that you're seeing the quality of the effluent because of EPA's regulations on the systems where our sewer treatment plants are producing near potable grade water. We've had arguments going on in some jurisdictions they call a toilet the tap and then oh god I don't want that Singapore they have a thing they call new water which is the water from their wastewater treatment plants goes directly into their potable water system. It is a cleaner, more pure source than any other water on the island. You'll see that around the world in the next 15 years. It's one water, it doesn't matter if it's got a lot of pollutants in it it's less expensive to treat it bring it up to potable standards than it is to ship something in from a thousand miles away. So reduce reuse, recycle and the 30 or 40 other minutes of activity I wanted to talk to you about but are a little limited in a 7 minute speech. Thank you Carol.