1. Technology transfer in reality : The case of Korea Sept. 2000, Lyon Suk-Hoon Woo wasang@shinbiro.com KEMCO (Korea Energy Management Corporation)

2. 1. Technology transfer in real project 4 General Comment –Technology is not a normal item that can be easily exchanged or transferred! –In most cases, technology transfer is a by- product of an activity, like FDI, joint R&D, or some other international cooperation –To find some solid base for the technology transfer, the market potential is needed in order to make the transferred technology work in climate change mitigation activities.

3. 1. Technology transfer in real project (cont.) 4 The problem of Barrier Approach –Common assumption : If we remove the barriers to the technology transfer, then the technology will flow to the developing and least developed countries.  But what is the motivation of the stake-holders in real practice including the technology transfer activities of the article 4.5? 4 Careful and detailed design to satisfy all participants including the strategy analysis.

4. 2. TCAPP-Korea : basic approach 4 Bilateral Framework 4 Criteria for the priority targeting –Market potential –Pre-standardization stage (after the R&D phase, before the commercialization stage in recipient Party) –Soft-oriented technology including know-how and management skills

5. 4 General survey based on the assessment made by10 year national energy R&D plan –Strategic selection process instead of Bottom- up approach 4 3 fields selected –ESCO(Energy Service Company) and energy management –LFG Gas Utilization –Waste Heat Recovery 2. TCAPP-Korea : selected items

6. 3. Status of Cooperation : ESCO 4 ESCO-Korea –New methods for the GHG emission reduction (1998) –Public funding mechanism (Public energy loan for ESCO with the interest rate of 5.5) –Public support including the energy auditing technology (KEMCO support)

7. Status and strategy of ESCO 4 New industry just started 4 Local knowledge in building and light fields are relatively strong 4 But lack in technology and experiences in energy efficiency projects in industrial process : technological barrier

8. Cooperation scheme Hyundai Motor (Ulsan) Hyundai Motor (Ulsan) EPS-Korea (Recipient) Co-auditing in site and ESCO project Sanfra (Provider) KEMCO (Korea) NREL (US) MOU Project Level Participant Level Institutional Level Setp. 2000

9. 4. Barriers already identified 4 Difference of business practice of each country 4 Institutional barriers : delay of decision- making process 4 Funding coordination : public fund and donor participation 4 Cultural difference and language

10. 5. Further steps to go 4 Identification of energy efficiency projects in Ulsan 4 Funding mechanism for the demo projects 4 Maintenance scheme 4 Knowledge-sharing among Korean ESCOs