Accenture Betting On Science Study Overview
Accenture Betting On Science Study Overview
Accenture Betting On Science Study Overview
Study Overview
1. Study Overview
There are a number of reasons for this uncertainty, but technology assumptions are a key driver. New
technologies that either have higher yields per unit of energy input, or allow new sources of energy to
be cost-competitive have the potential to completely change future supply and demand levels. In
addition, future options to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) will vary from those being widely
considered today. Transport fuels account for approximately 50 percent of global primary oil
consumption and up to 30 percent of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.1
Accenture’s study looks at technologies in transport fuels that have the potential to “disrupt” the
current views of supply, demand and GHG emissions in the next 10 years.
The purpose of this study was to demystify these technologies––by providing data on when and
what the trajectory might be for commercial viability––and by highlighting the key challenges in
economically bringing these technologies to market.
Accenture is committed to uncovering the key ingredients to help each of our clients develop into a
high-performance business. Accenture’s first biofuels study, “Irrational exuberance”? An
assessment of how the burgeoning biofuels market can enable high performance—a supply
perspective (2007), explored the renewed emphasis of biofuels on the global stage. The following
year, we released “Biofuels’ time of transition: Achieving high performance in a world of increasing
fuel diversity.” This study further examines the future of fuel diversity, but explores options much
broader than biofuels such as vehicle electrification and the evolution of the internal combustion
engine. Through our ongoing High Performance Business research, Accenture is committed to
helping our clients in all industries achieve high performance. To review findings from our other
research and experiences with more than 500 high performers, visit www.accenture.com.
Tables 3, 4 and 5 later in this section summarize our assessment across the technologies. In almost
all cases, at least 2 of 4 criteria (used to determine whether a technology was “disruptive”) were met
for the technologies featured in this report. Most of the technologies met all four criteria. It is therefore
reasonable to believe that these technologies will have an impact on supply, demand and GHG
emissions in the relatively near future if successfully commercialized.
1. There is low-hanging fruit where the debate should no longer be about “if” or
“how,” but about “when” and “how fast.” Proactive government regulation has the
potential to support and accelerate the sustainable development of these technologies. For
example:
• Increasing yields without significantly increasing land use. Hybrid genetics and
biotechnology have driven a five-fold increase in average United States (US) corn yields since
1940.2 Because there is a significant difference in crop yields around the world (see Figure 1),
there is still potential to implement similar yield increases in other parts of the world, relatively
quickly. For example, better agronomy practices in Malawi increased corn yields from 1.2
million metric tons in 2005, to 2.7 million metric tons in 2006, and then 3.4 million metric tons
in 2007.3 These technologies and practices can (and are) being applied to other crops.
• Rewarding improvements in water and energy use. The reduction of energy and water
use, when made a priority, has significant potential to change the GHG footprint. For example,
POET has achieved an 80 percent reduction in water use versus ethanol production since
1987.4
• Supporting the use of waste to create energy or fuel. Waste is an underutilized feedstock
that will be increasingly used for energy or upgraded to increase product yields.5 The support
for the “waste-to-energy” and “waste-to-fuel” markets creates more demand for service
providers to collect and transport the waste.
• Continuing roll-out of higher-efficiency standards. The higher-efficiency standards that
governments require provide an incentive for companies to continue to improve the miles per
gallon (mpg) of their combustion engines. Companies profiled in this report are claiming up to
50 percent improvements, albeit with disparity across markets (for example, in 2009, Europe
at 49 mpg and Japan at 46.9 mpg, are almost double the US at 27.5 mpg); this could deliver a
significant shift in the forecasted growth in demand globally.
• Genetically engineered feedstocks that increase the yield density and reduce the intensity of
pre-treatment and required enzyme. There is even research being done to build the enzyme
into the feedstock.
• A “diesel” solution through synthetic biology that allows sugar cane to be converted into a
clean diesel.
• Microbes that have been able to overcome the toxicity challenges of converting starches and
sugars to butanol.
• Genetically modified algae that have higher yields and can be cultivated and harvested at
lower cost.
7
Table 1. Comparison of algae and soybean resource requirements
Soybean Algae*
Gallons oil/year 3 billion 3 billion
Gallons oil/acre 48 1,200
Total acres 62.5 million 2.5 million
2
*Based on algae grown in open ponds with daily productivity of 10 grams/m with
15 percent triacyglycerol (TAG).
However, of all the technologies Accenture has reviewed in this study, we believe that algae will
be the most difficult and will take the longest to achieve commercial scale. Furthermore, based
on our review of more than 20 players, it will take significant long-term commitment to reduce
our current cost estimates––ranging from approximately $2 to $8 per liter ($8 to $30 per gallon)
and to scale-up the production of strains and processes that are company-specific,
environment-specific (i.e., location and conditions), and have multiple interdependent steps.
However, this report contains case studies of three algae companies, all of whom claim that
they will reach the first commercial plant stage in less than five years. If they are successful,
then the scale-up of algae may be seen more quickly. In addition, recent commitments by
ExxonMobil to invest $600 million in algae research in cooperation with Synthetic Genomics;
Chevron’s investment in Solazyme; Valero’s investment in Solix; Shell’s investment in Cellana;
and the recently announced Joint Development Agreement between BP and Martek, suggest
that the major oil companies are in algae for the long term. Although Accenture believes it will
take 10 years for algae to reach commercial stage, the companies featured in this report could
prove us wrong.
4. Technologies and assets will be combined and evolve. The lines between
technologies and how they will be commercialized are gray. Accenture’s view is that the final
scale will be achieved by a combination of first- AND second-generation technologies—rather
than by any one technology in isolation. There is increasing creative application of multiple
technologies to the process of using biomass to produce different products, while continuing to
reduce costs. For example:
5. Batteries are the “feedstock” of electrification and constrain its potential. The case
for the electrification of vehicles is well understood. This is evidenced by the regulatory and
private support for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). However, in the same way that
feedstock characteristics and supply constrain the potential of biofuels, battery characteristics
and supply constrain electrification, highlighting a number of challenges that need to be
overcome.
Today, only lithium-ion batteries can provide the necessary energy density and power density
required for PHEVs. However, lithium is expensive, combustible, and scarce (there are currently
only 11 major producing countries, dominated by South America, with a number of sources
being remote and difficult to access). Production is also concentrated in three countries: China,
Japan and South Korea. Given these constraints, many of the countries supporting
electrification of vehicles are increasingly recognizing that developing battery capabilities is as
important as supporting the purchase of PHEVs or building charging infrastructure. For
example, the US has earmarked $2.4 billion for battery development8, and both A123 and GM
are building lithium-ion battery manufacturing plants in Michigan.9 Although this addresses some
of the production risks, the United States will still need to import almost all of the lithium
required.
Utility Pacific Gas and Supplier of electricity, 2008: Piloted plug-in Prius in
Electric Company natural gas, hydroelectric $40.9 billion 2006. Testing four EVs
power (total assets); (Ford Escape PHEV,
Scion e-box BEV,
$14.6 billion
Mitsubishi i-Miev and a
(operating
second Toyota Prius
revenues)
PHEV) in their own fleet.
7. At least in the next five years, possibly even 10, PHEV scale-up is not dependent
on comprehensive “smart” grids. Although many of the pilots testing PHEVs are related
to smart grid initiatives, it should be clear that the initial scale-up of PHEVs does not require a
comprehensive smart grid. For example, in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s study
to assess the impact of PHEV penetration rates on Xcel Energy’s Colorado territory, it was
concluded that up to 500,000 PHEVs could be supported without the need for additional
network capacity.11 It is true that off-peak charging is absolutely critical if the cost benefits of
running vehicles off grid power are to be maximized without large-scale investment. This could
initially be performed with a meter or timer to “turn on” the charging during off-peak hours (for
example, between 1 a.m. to 5 a.m.), without the need for a full smart grid. In the medium term,
there will need to be some intelligence built into the system, as the utility will need to monitor
and bill for the charging. In addition, there are companies looking at software to charge vehicles
under centralized control (for example, allowing the consumer to subscribe to a plan, with a third
party acting as an aggregator).12 This would simplify matters for the utilities in terms of
managing the load to the grid, as the utility could collaborate with a third party to optimize
charging. However, the scale-up of PHEVs will need to be monitored due to the eventual stress,
wear and additional capacity requirements it will place upon the grid. In the long run (10 to 20
years), when there is significant penetration of PHEVs, a smart grid would be beneficial in
optimizing the additional load and taking advantage of opportunities such as vehicle-to-grid
(V2G).
9. Markets will optimize around their own domestic agenda, local resources and
local economic development opportunities. Today, transportation fuels are dominated
by globally traded and efficiently produced hydrocarbons. It is hard to imagine that a fragmented
market would provide an improvement. However, what the global hydrocarbon market does not
do is make optimal use of local resources, force diversity (and therefore increased security) of
supply, and allow governments to put a price on the level of GHG abatement it believes it can
afford and achieve. In our review of markets, we see Brazil looking at technologies that
maximize the value from sugar cane; South Korea and Japan very focused on electrification;
and the United States and China exploring all options. The suite of technologies will likely be the
same, but the weighting will differ dramatically by market, as illustrated in Figure 3.
13
Figure 3. Government and private support (between 2004 and 2008) across the 10 markets.
Evolution Fungible Fuels Electrification
Next Next PHEV/EV+
Waste-To- Marine Synthetic Bio- Airline Vehicle
Generation Generation Butanol Algae Electrification Batteries Charging
Fuel Scrubbers Biology Crude Drop-Ins To Grid
ICE Agriculture Of Engines
US PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
Canada PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
UK PI PI PI PI PI PI PI* PI PI PI
Germany PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
France PI PI PI PI* PI* PI PI PI
Netherlands PI PI PI PI PI* PI PI PI PI
China PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
Japan PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
South Korea PI PI PI PI PI PI
Brazil PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
Key
Neither regulation/targets nor gov’t incentives/investment PI - Is there a company or plant developed with this technology.
One of either regulation/targets or gov’t incentives/investment PI*-Investment by an IOC (for example, Shell, BP, Total) not in IOCs headquarters country
Both regulation/targets and gov’t incentives/investment Note: investor can be from another market but the company and investment is in this country
Throughout our report, we have assessed each of the technologies based on the four criteria of
scaleability, GHG emissions, cost and scale. In isolation, the technologies we selected look promising,
with most meeting all four criteria. However, it is important to note that all of the technologies are “in
play” now, and that there is a race to commercialization. The success of one technology will impact the
potential market of the others. We do believe in more diversity in technologies.
Figure 4 is Accenture’s view of how the market may evolve over the next 15+ years. It is based on our
analysis of each technology, the current cost, the S-curve, the challenges and the improvement drivers.
The chart is limited to the technologies covered in this report, and although we will have missed
technologies that will be successful, we do believe that these are the most promising. We have
presented our best estimate of costs, but have stayed away from predicting market share as this chart
would look very different were it cut individually for each of the 10 countries in the report.
Evolutionary
Next-generation
internal With existing infrastructure and With VW and Toyota internal In most cases, improvements For the first wave of
combustion manufacturers already on combustion engines already in internal combustion engines improvements (i.e., the OEM
engine board, rolling out internal coming close to 50 mpg, will have a lower cost to and start-ups in this report), it
combustion engine improvements to these engines implement than building is likely that some will be
improvements will be one of could deliver 100 mpg by 2030. electric vehicles (EVs)/ hybrid commercialized in the next five
the easier technologies to electric vehicles (HEVs)/ plug- years.
implement. in hybrid electric vehicles
(PHEVs).
Next-generation
agriculture Energy cane, miscanthus, Energy crops/root biomass are Latest estimates for most There are already
sweet sorghum have the carbon negative overall, with energy crops suggest costs demonstration plants using
highest estimated ethanol yield available data suggesting below $0.50 per liter. With corn cobs and wheat straw and
potential (more than 9,000 savings of 31 to 89 percent continued improvements, this plantings of various grasses
liters per hectare) and can be compared to replaced makes them cost competitive and sorghum. Commercial
grown in a wider range of hydrocarbon fuel. with oil at (or possibly even sales of dedicated energy
geographies/ land types (for below) $65 per barrel. crops have already begun, with
example, marginal). Pretreatment and enzymes are a well-established market for
probably closer to $0.79 to genetically enhanced/modified
$1.06 per liter ($3 to 4 per conventional row crops.
gallon) today, but Accenture
believes this should continue to
improve, with targets closer to
$0.53 to $0.79 per liter ($2 to
$3 per gallon) by
commercialization.
Waste-to-fuel ?
High theoretical feedstock Some incineration processes Feedstock costs represent a Hybrid technology is the
availability and modular are fairly GHG intensive. More considerable proportion of furthest away, but several
conversion technologies, but advanced techniques offer biofuel production costs; with prominent players are aiming
collection and transportation better emissions reduction under zero or even negative to be commercial within three
logistics that are not reliant performance, and it is likely feedstock costs (for example, years.
upon hydrocarbons may prove that a reduction in GHG will be due to tipping fees), the
the crunch point. a requirement. economics of waste-to-fuel
processes appear favorable.
Marine ?
scrubbers Need to identify/engineer a Will avoid significant increase Dependent on differential Commercialization expected by
winning technology solution in net CO2 emissions by between HSFO and LSFO and 2011—for at least one
and standardize production offering alternative to on where the vehicles operate. company.
process to achieve scale, but it upgrading HSFO to meet It is expected that for some
is expected that this technology IMO’s sulfur emissions limits vehicles it will make sense
will prevent at least 20 percent for marine transportation. while for others it will not.
of the current HSFO market
from switching to LSFO.
Revolutionary
Synthetic
biology: Sugar
cane-to-diesel Theoretically constrained only Will be similar to sugar cane Estimated costs for first Building of commercial plants
by sugar cane availability. (88 percent reduction) commercial plant are expected due to start in 2011, with
However, a key challenge is at $45 to $75 per barrel. commissioning in 2013.
scaling up the process, at a
competitive cost. Currently less
than 3.8 million liters per year,
mLpy (1 million gallons per
year, mgpy) produced in pilot
facilities, although commercial-
scale production has been
demonstrated in other
industries.
Butanol
A fungible fuel with a wide Aim is for 80 percent reduction Target approximately $50 to Commercialization expected by
range of applications that can based on use of combined heat $60 per barrel of oil. 2014.
be produced from a wide range and power.
of possible feedstocks. New
processes have been proven at
pilot scale, with demo plants on
the way.
Bio-crude
As with all biomass conversion GHG balance depends on the With the anticipated scaling Companies projecting
processes, feedstock is the process used, but the best efficiency and technology, bio- commercial operation within
most likely bottleneck. have a GHG impact crude from both pyrolysis and five years.
significantly above 30 percent. catalytic hydrothermal
upgrading are expected to be
competitive within this range.
Algae ? ?
Algae is plentiful and high Technology to sequester CO2 Target approximately $60 per Commercialization not
yielding, but there is the from power plants being barrel of oil. This is currently expected for another 10 years,
challenge of which strain or developed by several aggressive given the National although some companies
strains—that is, need to companies. Renewable Energy Laboratory have made commitments for
identify/engineer a high oil- estimate of $2.24 to $8.45 per earlier dates.
yielding and highly productive liter ($9 to $32 per gallon),
strain and standardize which is consistent with our
production process to achieve research findings.
scale.
Airline drop-ins ? ?
Although it is still to be Will likely be part of the Producing a biofuel that can Technology has been proven; it
determined whether there will requirement. replace jet will be one of the is reliant on regulation as
be enough feedstock for an more expensive processes production costs may be above
airline biofuel to account for 20 because of the tight $45 to $90 per barrel of oil.
percent of jet fuel, the specification.
combination of design
improvements and biofuel
could reduce fuel consumption
by 20 percent.
Charging ?
Market growth will be A number of pilots are currently Utilities and/or businesses Charging points are currently
dependent on the up-take of demonstrating the ability to use would own the charging points commercially available and are
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. intermittent renewable energy (estimated at approximately being rolled out as part of pilots
sources, such as wind or solar, $5,000 per unit) and would across the globe.
to charge vehicles at the offer subscriptions to
charging points. consumers, competitive at $40
per barrel of oil, dependent on
consumer preferences.
Vehicle-to-grid ? ? ?
(V2G)
V2G will gain momentum in While savings will vary by At full scale, target estimates AC Propulsion already has
vehicle fleets, but is unlikely to market, V2G has the potential are that V2G will be developed a vehicle with
reach 20 percent impact in the to reach up to 99 percent competitive at between $40 to bidirectional power flow, and
consumer market by 2030. savings over the hydrocarbon it $60 per barrel of oil for plug-in the communications systems
is replacing if renewable hybrid electric vehicles and, in required to support V2G are
energy is optimized. theory, at $0 per barrel of oil for currently in demonstration
electric vehicles (as the phase. AutoPort is in limited
consumer would be able to sell production of electric vehicles
power back to the grid). with V2G built-in, indicating
Furthermore, potential revenue V2G could be commercially
streams from providing available within the next five
ancillary services to the grid years.
could offset these costs,
rendering the technology even
more cost competitive.
However, there are
considerable assumptions in
these assumptions.
Disruptive Technologies
Next-generation internal combustion engine. Significant gains are achievable, which are often
overlooked. In-house developments by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), coupled with
best-in-class start-up technologies, will mean that the automotive industry as a whole can make
significant advances in the efficiency of the internal combustion engine. Getting more miles per
gallon out of conventional vehicles achieves the same end-goals of lowering carbon emissions
and increasing energy security as the movement toward the electrification of transport. While
there are significant requirements for infrastructure and incentives to bring about the widespread
electrification of vehicles, improvements to the internal combustion engine could be quickly
deployed and assuage many of the voices currently clamoring for change.
Next-generation agriculture
Stretching further with innovation and technology. New agriculture is in its infancy. There is
significant potential for improvement, particularly given the historic advances made with genetic
modification (GM) of crops to obtain desired characteristics, increase yield and reduce harvesting
and processing costs. This is coupled with the innovation seen in first-generation players to drive
down costs, energy and water use, and GHG emissions. The biggest challenge is in the
deconstruction stage, with high costs for pretreatment and enzymes. These costs have to go
down, but improvements will come from optimizing the whole system, from feedstock to
production.
Waste-to-fuel
An important feedstock source. The production of transport fuel from waste is a nascent
technology, largely in the lab and pilot stages of commercialization at present. Subsequently,
while there are small local government pilot projects in place, there is little legislative support or
financial incentive to develop the technology at the current time. However, if the technology can
be brought to scale, then waste feedstock processing could solve two problems at once—a
source of low-cost, low-carbon renewable fuel, and a solution to the ever more critical issue to
landfill reduction. With such obvious benefits, it would seem likely that this technology is suitable
for a much larger role in the world’s future transport fuel mix.
Marine scrubbers
Alternative to upgrading refineries and increasing refinery CO2 . This technology could avoid
both the need for significant capital investment to upgrade refineries to produce more low sulfur
fuel oil (LSFO) and greater dependence on costlier, low sulfur crudes. It also has the potential to
significantly and economically reduce emissions from seagoing vessels beyond that which can
be achieved by simple fuel switching. Marine scrubbing is technically feasible—several
companies have successfully tested the technology on demonstration projects. However, the
final technology winner has not yet been identified, with investment dollars currently spread
across seawater and fresh water solutions.
Butanol
Application of synthetic biology could resolve issues. Fuel from butanol is a highly desirable
product with energy content similar to gasoline—higher octane and less affinity to water—
meaning it can be transported through existing pipelines, use existing infrastructure and be
blended with gasoline at ratios much higher than ethanol. However, there are issues hampering
the production of butanol and the economics are unproven. Researchers are looking to adapt
traditional butanol production (via the ABE or acetone-butanol-ethanol process) by consolidation
of process steps and potential genetic modification of bacteria. Genetic engineering and
advances in synthetic biology could also lead to breakthroughs from companies such as Gevo
and Butamax, who have proven the technology at pilot scale and are both planning commercial
plants in the next few years.
Algae
Incredible yields but many variables, little industry consensus and high cost.
Technologically, the algae industry is very fragmented—possibly the most fragmented of all of
the industries covered in this report. There are many players, and the oil industry (including
Shell, ExxonMobil, BP, Valero and Chevron) is looking at a range of methods to eliminate steps
in the process to reduce complexity and cost. As companies try to find the lowest cost option,
several different operating models are emerging. In this report, Accenture has provided case
studies of companies with plans for commercial production within five years. However, there are
considerable technical constraints. In ExxonMobil’s announcement of its investment in Synthetic
Genomics, the company stated that “significant work and years of research and development still
must be completed,” with the key challenge being “the ability to produce it [algae] in large
volumes which will require significant advances in both science and engineering”.14 It is
therefore likely that it may take more than current estimates of five years in order to reach
commercial scale.
Charging
Controlled charging infrastructure development benefiting from government support.
Controlled charging enables utilities to manage energy demand more effectively and
consumers to benefit from lower off-peak tariffs. This will be key in delivering the aspirations
of widespread electrification of vehicles. Municipalities across the globe have announced
ambitious roll-outs of charging point infrastructure. The growth of the controlled charging
market will be heavily dependent on the uptake of plug-in electric vehicles and how
incentives for the growth of PHEVs and EVs are driven/managed by policymakers and
businesses.
Vehicle-to-grid (V2G)
A long-term opportunity, dependent on significant PHEV/EV scale. V2G is technically
feasible with demonstration projects currently underway. These projects vary in focus, with
some assessing the communications between the vehicle and the grid, some looking at how
to maximize vehicle storage to increase the quantity of renewables being used, and some
looking at a more integrated smart grid offering. All projects, albeit in the early stages, have
proven that V2G has the potential to significantly disrupt the supply and demand
relationships—with end-electricity consumers potentially becoming an essential grid storage
resource—and change both the electric power and transport fuels landscapes. However, to
reach this potential, V2G is dependent upon the commercialization of electric-drive vehicles,
cooperation between the various industry players, and the education of consumers. Initial
electrification initiatives will determine the latter’s potential success.
Markets
These include:
• Improvements are limited to new vehicles. For many of the technologies (most next-
generation internal combustion engine improvements, ethanol beyond the 10 percent blending
limit, electrification) the key constraint is turnover of the vehicle fleet. For example, in 2007 the
median age of a passenger vehicle in the United States was 9.2 years, meaning turnover will be
almost a decade.18
• Ethanol blending wall. The US is close to the 10 percent limit of ethanol that can be blended
into current gasoline vehicles, and the allowable share of corn ethanol specified in the
Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) program. There is a movement by the American Coalition for
Ethanol (ACE) to increase the blending wall to 15 percent19––although only flex-fuel vehicles
(FFVs) are currently allowed to use blends containing more than 10 percent ethanol, there is
evidence to suggest that blends of up to 15 percent will not damage gasoline engines20––and to
increase the allowable corn ethanol share of the RFS. This would buy the industry time to
commercialize and roll out cellulosic ethanol. If the blending wall does not change, then the pace
of the industry will be constrained by the roll-out of FFVs and the ethanol refueling infrastructure.
US Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman, Tom
Harkin, have both expressed their support for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
authorize a higher blend;21 a decision by the EPA is expected by the end of 2009.
‒ Biofuels: New build plants are expensive, so new producers need the ability to leverage the
existing ethanol and hydrocarbon infrastructure and to optimize the provision of fuel to
customers. This will, in some cases, require the coming together of hydrocarbon and biofuel
value chains, but will be important in driving down scale-up costs.
‒ Marine scrubbers: Ensuring the solution is optimized for the current fleet will be critical given
the time it takes for the fleet to turnover.
‒ Electrification: Understanding the state of the network, how much off-peak capacity is
available and how to manage wear on the infrastructure will be key to evaluating short-term
capital investment needs.
• Agreement on standards, measurement and monitoring. It is important for all the
technologies to agree and roll-out standards quickly—whether they are fuel specifications,
emissions, charging, etc.—because a lack of standards will create inefficiencies and increase the
commercialization/scale-up costs. In addition, these standards need to be enforced and, in some
cases (for example, marine scrubbers), strictly monitored.
So what does this impending shift in future transport fuels mean for government or companies today?
We believe the transport fuel market of the future will include players from different industries (including
governments, utilities, energy, chemicals, pharmaceutical and consumer electronics to name a few)
who will bring different capabilities and assets that will shape the market.
However, Accenture does see a few common key capabilities for achieving high performance:
• Scientists and engineers in leadership positions. Most companies entering this market will
have product and process patents around their technologies and processes. Strong R&D
capability is a necessity as we are looking for breakthrough solutions. Integration of the
technology with other technologies will also be an obvious capability. However, equally key to
successful commercialization are leadership and communication and the ability to provide fact-
based explanations to regulators and the public and to address often technical questions frankly
and honestly. For governments, this means that more scientists will be chosen for key energy
department roles.
• Partnering and business model flexibility. Commercialization of these technologies will take
cooperation across many industries. In reviewing more than 100 companies, we have found
plans for many different business models, from traditional plant joint ventures to fully integrated
ventures, with capabilities across the value chain, including different models for different
markets. In all cases, partnering is key to complementing in-house capability, whether to access
the feedstock, the battery, the customer market, the infrastructure or capability. Also, the
business models will evolve as commercialization starts to shape how the market will operate.
"GM Begins Work at Michigan Facility Where Batteries for the Chevrolet Volt Will Be Manufactured," General
Motors press release, August 13, 2009, www.gm.com/experience/technology/news/2009/brown_081309.jsp.
10
Sources: Panasonic (http://panasonic.co.jp); Chevron (www.chevron.com); PG&E (www.pge.com/).
11
K. Parks, P. Denholm and T. Markel, "Costs and Emissions Associated with Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Charging in the Xcel Energy Colorado Service Territory," National Renewable Energy Laboratory, May 2007,
www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/41410.pdf.
12
Accenture interviews – research from the University of California, Berkeley, Derek M. Lemoine and Daniel M.
Kammen).
13
Accenture analysis; New Energy Finance.
14
“ExxonMobil to Launch Biofuels Program,” ExxonMobil press release, July 14, 2009,
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/exxonmobil/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&ndmConfigId=1001106&n
ewsId=20090714005554&newsLang=en.
15
“Novozymes and Sinopec sign new second-generation framework agreement in China,” Novozymes press
release, February 2, 2009,
http://www.novozymes.com/en/MainStructure/PressAndPublications/PressRelease/2009/sinopec-
novozymes.htm.
17
"BDI BioDiesel Plant for Residual and Waste Materials in the Netherlands," BDI - BioDiesel International AG
press release, June 2, 2009, www.biodiesel-
intl.com/PressRoom/details.aspx?ID=166&LNG=EN&Menu=News&Inhalt=Normal.
18
“Table 1-25: Median Age of Automobiles and Trucks in Operation in the United States,” Research and
Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_25.html.
19
Letter to the US Environmental Protection Agency, from the American Coalition of Ethanol, July 17, 2009,
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/ACE_Comments_to_EPA_on_E15_waiver_717.pdf.
20
“Optimal Ethanol Blend-Level Investigation”, Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), November
2007, http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/ACE_Optimal_Ethanol_Blend_Level_Study_final_12507.pdf.
21
“All Star Lineup Wows NFU Convention,” National Farmers Union press release, March 9, 2009,
http://nfu.org/news/2009/03/09/all-star-lineup-wows-nfu-convention.html.
22
Accenture interview.