Lakeshore Industry Cluster Initiative Sponsors Manufacturing – Energy – Agriculture - Tourism THANK YOU! Lakeshore Industry Cluster Initiative Sponsors Diamond with support from WEDC Platinum  This slides shows the current sponsors of the initiative and their contribution levels. The Diamond level sponsor contributions are over $10,000 with the largest contributor the EDCMC at $50,000 . Platinum: $5,000 - $9,999 Gold: $3,000 - $4,999 Silver – Under $3000 Sponsorship commitments can be spread over multiple fiscal years through 1st quarter of 2014 if necessary. For instance LTC contributions were made in 2 fiscal year commitments – 2012-13 and 13-14 budget years. As is New North’s Gold Ben Cress Wisconsin Public Service NextEra Energy Point Beach Nuclear Plant Silver Door County EDC Keller, Inc. Kewaunee County EDC Two Rivers Water & Light Alliant Energy Sturgeon Bay Utility Commission First Business Bank

Fertilizer Value Stays the same Regional Biogas Value Chain RINS EXPERTISE – value $7 Mil US Oil / Integris Regional differential value $186M, CBG value + fuel value not purchased Co-op Digester Independent Farm 27 in Wisconsin Fertilizer Value Stays the same Manure Commercial Waste? Food Processing By-Products Conditioning Separator Electricity Liquid Solids Cleaning CO2 Removal Cost to build w/ digester $4 M Pipeline ? Baldwin WI Build interconnect / Gate Station Quality - Unknown Transportation Collection Manure value 438,000 head X 27,800BTU/day X 365 days/year = 4.8 T-BTU/yr (6.8 cents/ lb. to handle) Value = $48M RINS Value = $3.20 per M Btu By-Products Value ? $10/M BTU Example- Fair Oaks Farm 4 Dairys-14000 cows – central cleaner Digester Infrastructure Specs & Cost Head 1000-15000 $1.8 M - $15 M Heating Dry Commercial Propane Comparison 1.39 gal. 75K BTU/ Gal $14/m BTU Milk Trucks Schneider Pabl Waste Mgmt Vintor Veino UPS 11 sites 3.5 cents KW 10,000 BTU / KW/HR Site Fleet 75 vehicles 4 partial $1-$16 M Corn Dryers Vessels Saxn Vellito Additional Benefits Greenhouse Gas reduction Waste Management Odor Control Sustainability Local Ground Water Protection Air pathogens Reducing Fossil fuel use Badger – CNG Preferred Alternative Marine companies retrofitting vessels Politics environment needs to be considered and assessed Not reviewed during session, needs future analysis High Pressure – 3600 psi Tube Trucks cost $250,000 to transport CNG Gas Cheaper than Manure to haul

CLEAN POWER PLAN Arthur J. Harrington Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. aharrington@gklaw.com 414-287-9414 12433714 3

Overview of Presentation Overview of EPA’s Clean Power Plan Timeline for comments (EPA/State) and implementation of the Plan Other future regulations for Utility Industry Summarize opportunities/challenges for [Industrial User (‘IU”)] under the Plan Highlights and potential IU future strategies to mitigate risk/explore benefits resulting from the Plan

Overview of Clean Power Plan Provides emission guidelines for states to follow and developing state implementation plan (“SIP”) Applies to coal-fired electrical generation units (“EGU’s”) ID should be concerned about impact of Plan in those states where it is facilities served by coal-fired generation. Goal is to get a 30% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 compared against 2012 baseline. The Plan has already attracted several legal challenges

EPA Proposed Strategies for States to Implement EPA Goals Reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the covered EGU Increase the use of existing natural gas fired combustion EGU Expand the use of low carbon renewable-energy generating units Expand the use of demand-side energy-efficiency programs for EGU customers Guidelines for states to implement the goals are not limited to these 4 building blocks and can be expanded

Timeline for Plan Plan proposed on June 18, 2014 Public comments due on December 1, 2014 EPA to finalize Rule on June 18, 2015 State must submit SIP by June 18, 2016 State must meet CO2 goals by 2030

Summary of Opportunities/Costs for IU Under the Plan The Plan when adopted presents a significant increase in electrical costs for IU in those states where there is a high percentage of base-load generation provided by coal fired EGUs If IU has already employed significant energy efficiency reductions for its facilities, it will be difficult to “squeeze out” more efficiencies at its facilities under the Plan. IU may want to consider is consolidating production from other parts of the country into those areas that are served by fewer coal fired EGUs. IU may want to consider taking steps now to reduce energy costs and increase revenue opportunities under the Plan.

Key Potential Regulatory Involvement by IU Comments on Federal Plan. Involvement on State SIP task force.

Comments on Federal Plan Plan should clarify that any actions by customers would be voluntary and compensated. Plan should allow for and encourage the creation of incentives to shift production to more efficient facilities, including shifts to facilities in other states even if those states are not in the same region.

Involvement on State SIP Task Force IU should monitor the draft SIPs in those states where it has large facilities and file comments to those SIPs where appropriate. Want to make sure that there are no mandatory requirements on customers and that customers are fully compensated for their energy-efficiency and renewable-energy projects. Want States where IU has facilities to work with other states to allow IU to receive credit for its efficiency gains from shifting production to more efficient IU facilities, where appropriate.

Potential Steps to Reduce Costs and Increase Revenue Opportunities under Plan Energy efficiency: Document efficiency gains, including gains from shifting to high-efficiency plants. On-site energy generation: Solar: Consider taking advantage of 30% investment tax credit and beneficial state programs. Biomass/biogas generation: Consider ability to qualify for 30% investment tax credit, to offset high cost/carbon flat-load energy, and to use waste heat. Natural gas generation/cogeneration: Consider opportunities for facilities with high cost/carbon energy, flat-load, and potential use of waste heat (10% investment tax credit for cogeneration) Consider third-party financing of generation facilities.

What’s Trending in Alternative Sectors? Current position of alternative power source in the economy Major roadblocks to growth (regulatory, economic, political, etc.) Recommendations for action/solutions