sc/p/2009_0037_v1 an introduction to. agenda introduction to clean coal ltd. – overview: who is...

SC/P/2009_0037_v1

AnIntroduction

to

Agenda

• Introduction to Clean Coal Ltd.– Overview: Who is CCL?– CCL Corporate Structure– Resources and Experience– Current Projects

• Introduction to Underground Coal Gasification– Overview: What is UCG?– Benefits: Why implement UCG?

• Clean Coal’s CRIP Technology and Process– Overview of CRIP– Benefits of CRIP– Syngas and Economics – Site Selection Criteria

• Current Project: CECIC Partnership• Appendices

Intro to CCL: Overview

Who is Clean Coal Limited (CCL)?• CCL is the leading developer of Underground Coal Gasification (UCG)

technology and projects

• CCL specializes in the evaluation, design, implementation, financing and management of commercial UCG projects worldwide

• Headquarters in the UK and USA with commercial activity in strategic countries including the UK, US, Canada, China, Turkey, Belgium, Poland and Romania

Advanced UCG

Technology

Project Execution

Project Finance

Core Competencies

Intro to CCL: Corporate Structure

A family of businesses…

Intro to CCL: Resources and Experience

CCL’s Resources• Experience: Our team managed the longest and largest UCG trial in Europe.

CCL currently has the most UCG projects underway worldwide

• Proprietary methodology: CCL has commercialized the CRIP methodology, most efficient and effective way to exploit deep coal resources using UCG

• Proprietary technology: including specialized burners, geological modelling techniques/software and financial modelling software

• Capital: we invest our own capital, and have access to large pools of global investment capital

• Partners: World-class partners including the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (additional technical expertise), Northern China Power Engineering Co (engineering design for power plants and equipment)

Intro to CCL: Current Activity

CCL’s Worldwide Activity

Intro UCG: Overview

What is Underground Coal Gasification?• UCG is the process of gasifying coal in situ to produce high-quality syngas

• Syngas can then be converted into a variety of products: • Methanol for power generation;• Diesel fuels• Jet fuels• Hydrogen• Urea for fertilizer

• Although not new, UCG has developed dramatically in recent years: opportunity now exists for progressive companies to participate in a new industry environment

Intro UCG: Benefits

Why implement UCG? Many critical benefits…• Safety: no personnel required to work underground

• Environmental:• Ash is left underground• CO2 can easily be captured and re-stored• Much smaller surface footprint (as compared with traditional mining)• No impact on surface or shallow ground waters• Reduced SOx, NOx, methane, and Hg emissions

• Economic:• Deep, un-mineable coal can be effectively exploited as new source of

energy• The process may be significantly cheaper than that for natural gas• UCG process is economically competitive with gas, coal and LNG• CO2 capture can provide carbon credits• Syngas can be converted to many different end products

CRIP Methodology

Two wells drilled into the coal

1. Injection Well to introduce the oxidants (H2O/air or H2O/O2);

2. Production Well to bring the product gas to the surface.

3. Advanced Directional Drilling to link the two wells

4. Air/O2 Injection, depending on financial model/syngas use.

Controlled Retraction Injection Point (CRIP)• Methodology developed by CCL’s team• Most efficient UCG methodology, especially for deep coal• Least amount of drilling

CRIP module design: cross sectional view

CRIP Methodology

CRIP Cavity1 - 1

CRIP Cavity 1 - N

CRIP CavityN - 1

CRIP Cavity N - N

Module N

Module 1

Pillar Area

Pillar Area

Row of Injection Wellheads

Row of Production Wellheads

CavityWidth

Inter-moduleDistance

Row of Cavity N

Row of Cavity1

CRIP module design: view from above

CRIP Methodology

Future Expansion Panel

Drilling Panel

Venting and Cooling Panel

Gasification Panel

Depleted Panel

O2Compressor

PowerGeneration

AirSeparation

Surface Facilities

InjectionWellhead Row

ProductionWellhead Row

Gasification panel layout and lifecycle:1. Exploration2. Drilling and well installation3. Active gasification4. Venting and cooling5. Return to ambient conditions.

All these phases take place concurrently during commercial UCG.

View from above.

CRIP Methodology

Benefits of CRIP relative to other UCG methodologies

• Minimum disturbance to surface

• Minimum amount of drilling

• Maximum control over gasification process

• Most efficient UCG methodology, especially for deep coal

CRIP Methodology: Benefits

• Syngas produced during UCG is primarily composed of methane, hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide

• Unprocessed syngas undergoes treatment to remove water, sulphur, carbon dioxide and other waste products

– Treatments are well understood due to surface-level coal gasification

CompositionMethane10 – 20%

Hydrogen10 – 35%

Carbon Monoxide10 – 20%

Carbon Dioxide25 – 40%

UCG Syngas

Electricity Generation

Iron and Steel Production

Gas-to-liquids

Chemical Manufacturing

• Supply to adjacent power stations is often the optimal use• Using syngas directly avoids energy loss from conversion

processes

• High hydrogen content means ammonia can be created– Key input in fertiliser production

• Syngas can be used as a reduction agent in iron and steel production

• Production of fuels such as gasoline, diesel and methanol

End Uses

CRIP Methodology: Syngas

UCG is highly cost-competitive with other energy sources: will provide a low cost energy source for decades

Key issues:• Reduced capital expense: Unlike IGCC’s, no need to purchase gasifiers or build ash and slag

management facilities. With syngas stream continuity, there is also no need for gasifier redundancy.

• Reduce operating expense: Unlike conventional plants, there is no need to purchase, transport, store, or prepare coal. There is no need to re-brick the gasifier linings. Due to syngas stream continuity, plans have high capacity factors comparable to pulverized coal or natural gas plants, reducing down time.

• Reduced environmental management costs: Due to underground gasification environment, UCG facilities produce no SOX or NOx. Particulate streams and mercury biproducts are 50% of surface equivalents, and there is no production of ash.

• Fuel supply certainty: Because the supply of UCG syngas is local and continuous, operators face no risk in fuel availability, supply costs, or supply disruption.

CRIP Methodology: Economics

0.7

1.10.2

0.2

2.2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Drilling &Piping costs

Other opex Royalties Depreciation Total Costs

US

$ / m

mB

TU

• Virtually no competition for resources – lower acquisition cost

• Scalable nature of projects – production can be varied to meet demand

• Market constrained, not resource constrained

• It is envisaged that syngas for electricity production will be sold at a 20% discount to the natural gas price on a $ per energy content basis

– Syngas for other purposes could command a lower discount or even a premium

• Main costs are drilling the production and injection wells

• Key drivers of per-unit costs are:

– Coal seam depth and thickness

– Scale of the project

– Coal quality (heat content, moisture)

Indicative Syngas Sale Price Range

( 1 )

1 mmBTU = 1 mcf of methane

≈ 2 mcf of syngas

Ability to commercialise coal resources which are too deep or unsuitable for conventional mining

A cubic foot of syngas contains half the energy content of a cubic foot of natural gas

CRIP Methodology: Economics

Other values can be used if site conditions are suitable.

CRIP Methodology: Selection Criteria

18

Clean Coal China’s Primary UCG Pilot

• $9.0 million to fund pilot phase (burn in Q1 2011)– Exploration - $0.8mm– Design, construction & drilling - $1.8mm– Surface facilities - $2.2mm– Operation, staffing and other - $4.2mm

Current Project: Partnership w/ CECIC

19

Project Overview Commercial Options

• Coal resource well understood• Total estimated reserves: 1.0 billion tons• Target seam reserves: 653 million tons

– Avg. seam thickness: 7.9m – 320~599m deep

• Pre-feasibility study to be undertaken

• The syngas will be supplied to the power plants built by CECEP (formerly CECIC)

• Commercial development will proceed in three stages:– Stage 1: 25 MW Power Plant (Commissioning

expected by 2013)– Stage 2: 250 MW Power Plant– Stage 3: 1,000 MW Power Plant

Financial ProjectionsRegional Partner

• Project is a 49/51 joint venture with CECIC, a large, central state-owned company

– The strongest, largest and most competitive industry group in the field of energy conservation and environmental protection in china

– Clean Coal will fund the pilot phase

Cash flow positive by 2014

(75)

(50)

(25)

0

25

50

75

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fre

e C

ash

Flo

w (

US

$mm

)

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

Production (m

mB

TU

/d) .

Syngas Production

Free Cash Flow


CCL delivers project execution start to finish• Project Financing:

– CCL invests in UCG projects and also secures capital from other strategic and financial investors

• Project Assessment:– Assess geological capability of project including seismic surveys

– Assess economics and complete financial modelling to ensure its economic viability

• Technology:– Provide technical leadership from project inception to completion

– Contribute our proprietary technologies and methodologies

– Cutting edge research and continued technological development

• Project Execution:– Design process from underground all the way up to the power plant door

– On ground management of all construction, engineering and drilling

– Assuring environmental safety of the project


Thank you

www.cleancoalucg.com

Thank You!

Appendices

Appendices

项目地址

Previous Pilot: El Tremedal, Spain

Previous Pilot: El Tremedal, Spain

Source: BP

Intro to UCG: Economics

Syngas Composition

Intro to UCG: Output

Case Study 1: Reference Data

• Depth: 500 m• Thickness: 5.5 m• In-seam length: 500 m• Rank: Sub-bituminous• HHV: 20.9 GJ/t• Power: 40 MW per module• Number of modules/panel: 15 (run in parallel)• Total Power delivered/panel: 600 MWthermal

Block Flow Diagram of UCG

Cooling andWater/tarRemoval

H2S & CO2

Removal

Water & tar

CCPower

SNG GTL Chemicals

Gas Refining

Steam

H2S

Pumping

OxygenWater

Feeds

ASU

Coal

Water influx

Losses

Char

Ash

Raw Syngas

Refined Syngas

WaterTreatment

End-Products

CompressionCO2

SulphurRecovery

Sulphur

Waste

PipelineCO2

WaterRecycling

WaterSupply

Nitrogen

Gasifying Agents

Raw Syngas (dry)

UCG

CompressionIn-situ

sequestration

Compression

PumpingSparging

Case Study 1:

Case Study 1: Panel Data

• Inter-module distance: 15 m• Module life time: ~150 days• Gasification rate

- per module: 188 t/d - total: 2820 t/d

• One-year panel data- tonnage gasified: ~1 Mt - tonnage in place: ~2 Mt

• Energy recovery: 18.4 GJ/tonne of coal• Total energy recovery: ~18 400 TJ per year

Case Study 1: Syngas Data(Raw Syngas at wellhead)

• Flow- per module: ~18 000 Nm3/h - total: ~270 000 Nm3/h

• CompositionH2: 17.0 %CO: 10.8 %CH4: 9.0 %CO2: 22.5 %H2S: 0.6 %H2O: 40.0 %

• HHV: ~8 MJ/Nm3

• Temperature: ~300 °C• Pressure: ~46 bar

Case Study 1: Syngas Data(Dry Syngas after water cooling & removal)


• CompositionH2: 28.4 %CO: 17.9 %CH4: 15.0 %CO2: 37.7 %H2S: 1.0 %

• HHV: ~13 MJ/Nm3

• Temperature: ambiant• Pressure: ~45 bar

Case Study 1: Syngas Data(Refined Syngas after acid gas removal)


• Composition H2: 46.3 %CO: 29.2 %CH4: 24.5 %

• HHV: ~21 MJ/Nm3

• CO2 production: ~120t/h

• H2S production: ~2.5t/h

• Temperature: ambiant• Pressure: ~43 bar

Background of UCG Trial• Developing Technology from U.S and oil & gas• Industry –CRIP, in seam drilling, use of oxygen.• Thulin Trial(1979-87) – 860m depth, high CV gas.• European Working Group Report (1989)• Evaluated previous trials• Undertook economic evaluation and considered• That UCG in thinner and deeper seams feasible• Proposed two trials over a 15 year period at increasing depth.

Technical Objective of the 1st Trial• Demonstration of Long In-seam Drilling• Construction of a Competent gas Circuit between Injection and

Production Wells• Demonstration of Adequate Coal• Conversion

Case Study 2: El Tremedal, Spain

Site Location


Preparatory Stage• Geology and coal evaluation.• Drilling, completion of

boreholes,• Surface equipment.

Gasification Activities• Drying, pressurisation, ignition of

the coal• Development of cavity by means

of the CRIP manoeuvrePost-Burn Activities

• Determine cavity shape by drilling• Validate gasification models used

for process control• Site restoration

In-Seam Configuration and Project Plan


• Two successful ignitions, and seven satisfactory manoeuvres of the CRIP moveable injection system.

• Directional drilling produced satisfactory well construction.

• Gasification at greater depth enhances methane formation and cavity growth.

• • The engineering operated satisfactory

and the process is controllable, stopped and restarted.

• No evidence of contamination spread beyond the cavity or subsidence was observed.

Trial at 550m Depth (1992-1999)


Characteristics• Two dipping coalseams 7 to 14 mapart• Depth of 500-700metres• Seam thickness 1,9to 7,0 metres• Thin layer of clayunder both seams -sand layers abovethe coal wereknown butmanageable.• Tectonic frameworkhighly favourable togasification(Isolation by faults)

Geological Data from Test Site


Hydrogeology• Floor Thick Limestone• Roof 15m of Sand• Permeability's

• Coal: 1.96mD,• Sand Strata:17.6mD• Limestone: very low

• Drainage upwards and to N. East

• Aquifer location and protection favoured upper seam

Coal Analysis• Sub-Bituminous C• Vitrinite Reflectance 0.36%-0.43%• Proximate Analysis

• Moisture 45%• Ash 18%• Volatile Matter 26.5%

• Total Sulphur 7.3%• HHV 18095kJ/kg

Coal Seam and Strata Characteristics


Three Operational Areas of Test Site


• Duration: 7years, 1991 to 1998• Total Cost: $20 Million

Underground Gasification Europe, Teruel, Spain Wells were completed with casing & concentric tubing to provide necessary paths for production, injection, purge-gas & cooling water flows. A coiled tube located in the injection well was used to execute the controlled retraction injection point, CRIP

Source: “Underground Coal Gasification –A Joint European Field Trial in Spain”, Department of Trade & Industry, UK, December 1999



Gas Characteristics

• Coal Affected 290 tons• Product Gas 490 tons• Peak Power 8MW• Gas Composition (dry N2 free)

• Hydrogen 27%• Carbon Monoxide 14%• Methane 14%• Carbon Dioxide 45%

• Calorific value of product gas (LHV) 10.9MJ/m3

Key Results


Case Study 3: Queensland Australia

UCG Plant in Queensland Australia

Total resource: 364 million metric tons;

Average depth: 250 meters;

Coal seam over 10m thick

Total energy : 7,320 PJ of in-situ energy (1 petajoule = 1015 joules)

Recoverable energy : UCG syngas technology we can recover in excess of 4,245 PJ of energy as syngas


Stage 1: Preliminary Planning

In most projects the levels of existing exploration are not sufficient to define a geological resource with an acceptable risk reduction profile.

Necessary to define geological resource to JORC standard

Therefore, the Queensland project began with seismic studies and supplementary drilling programmes, to determine the structure of the coal field.

The total cost for the preliminary planning was US $1.4 million and took about 12 months to complete.


Stage 2: Pilot Project: Objectives:

• Demonstrate accuracy of our understanding of the site;• Confirm syngas production rates and composition;• Confirm linkage system;• Provide data for Commercial stage.

Pilot project was developed consisting of a single CRIP module (one horizontal borehole and one production well) with a small power plant.

Different injection mixes and cavity design procedures were investigated to ensure the full commercial project is designed to optimal levels.

Completed January 2009 and successfully demonstrated that a large proportion of the energy produced (68%) is in the form of methane and ethane.

The Pilot Project cost approximately US$15 million, and took 100 days.


Some of the gas (about 30%) from the Queensland project is expected to power a 400MW power plant for approximately 30 years.

Key Statistics

• The average in-situ energy on an air dried basis is 20.11 GJ/tonne of coal.• The key energy components in the gas are:

o Methane & Ethane (components of natural gas): 68%o Hydrogen & Carbon Monoxide: 32%

Stage 3: Commercial Production:

The Queensland project has entered commercial production. It is estimated that 50-60% of the resource will be used in the process.


Stage 3: Commercial Production:

Average Gas Energy Contribution (%)--------------------------------------------------Methane 58%Ethane 10%Carbon Monoxide 6%Hydrogen 26%

• One horizontal borehole unit (a CRIP module) of one kilometre in 5 metre thick coal seam and a heat value of 20 Mj/kg produces 50MW of energy and last for about a year.

Environmental Factors: Risk Assessment

• Methods & terminology may depend on country/region• Conceptual models• “Source–Pathway–Receptor”• “Pollutant linkage”

The most effeective way of reducing risk is the break the Pollutant Linkage.

•Remove receptor: Select deep coals (>300m)‐ These may be in regions of poor quality

groundwater unsuitable for consumption‐ Deep coal seams are more likely to isolate

contamination from receptors

•Isolate Source: ‐ Select regions with minimal faults & joints‐ Select sites away from receptors (e.g.

aquifers, abstraction wells)‐ Select sites with good thick aquitards

surrounding cavity‐ Consider accessory mineralogical

assemblages of surrounding strata & coal.

Environmental Factors: Site Selection

Environmental & process Issues:• Surface subsidence• Damage to overlying strata-

aquifers, coal seams etc• Preferential pathways• Enhanced permeability

Can Affect UCG Infrastructure• On site plant• Roads• Other buildings• Services

• Has been observed from previous UCG trials.

• Results from cavity propagation after UCG.

Environmental Factors: Subsidence

Environmental Factors: Subsidence

Coal and Overburden Characteristics

• Seam thickness and amount of coal gasified

• Seam Depth (overburden thickness)

• Geomechanical properties of the overburden (stiffness, yield strength)

• Fracture density and orientation

Surface deformation in deep UCG < shallow UCG- but wider distribution.

Environmental Factors: CO2 Storage

Source: LLNL

Source: UCG Partnership

Economics

Production Costs Estimates from Gas Producers:

•Carbon Energy•A$ 1.25 /GJ for UCG syngas (medium term outlook for Australian natural gas = A$7/GJ•Cost of power production = A$22.50 MWh

•Linc Energy•Cost of syngas = US$ 0.6 – 0.8 /GJ•Cost of synfuel = US$ 25-28/bbl•Power generation =US$13 -US$15 per MW

Economics

Extending Coal Resource Life• Proven global coal resources are estimated

to be over 900 billion tonnes• However, calculation is not rigorous• Reality: US and Russia have resources that

will last through the 21st century

0 100 200 300 400

Coal

Lignite

R/P Ratio - Years

Source: Energy Edge Ltd.

Source: Pan Fudan University

Economics

Clean Coal Limited (UK) Staff

Rohan Courtney OBE, Non-Executive Chairman

Rohan Courtney was in banking for 27 years and held the position of General Manager for Europe of State Bank of New South Wales for eight years until 1990. From 1990 to 1992 and at the request of the Bank of England, he was Group Chief Executive of the merchant bank Robert Fraser. He was Executive Chairman of West 175 Media Group from 1996 to 2001. He has held a number of directorships in a variety of industries. He was Non Executive Director (Senior Independent Director from 2000) of Tullow Oil plc from 1993 to 2007 and was Chairman of the Audit Committee. In 2005 he formed, together with Dr. Michael Green, the UCG Partnership, the professional body and centre of excellence for all information on underground coal gasification. He has been involved in the development of UCG since 2003.

Graham Chapman, MBA B.Sc (Hons) FGS, Chief Executive Officer

Graham spent 16 years in South Africa with Rand Mines and Ingwe Coal Corporation on operating mines, as a geologist and later in an executive role in Head Office. In 1996 he set up Ingwe's (later Billiton) operations in Indonesia. He successfully negotiated and managed two major joint ventures with Indonesian companies, controlling exploration activities and managing the Billiton operations throughout the country. In 2001 Graham transferred to the Melbourne Head Office of the newly created BHP Billiton Ltd as Vice President Strategy and was instrumental in producing the new company’s first public strategy. Graham formed Energy Edge Ltd., an innovative coal-focused consultancy in 2003, with four skilled professionals in the fields of energy and strategy development. The company established a large blue-chip client base of major energy organisations.


Catherine Bond, LLB non-practising Solicitor, Managing Director- Corporate

Catherine qualified as a solicitor in London in 1993 and worked with Jaques & Lewis (turning into Eversheds) for a number of years. Catherine joined Seymour Pierce, a London based investment bank, in 2000 as an equity leisure analyst and moved to the corporate finance department in 2002. She has advised on numerous listings, fundraisings and M&A transactions. In 2006, she became the Managing Director of European American Equities heading up the London office.

Douglas Harmer, Financial analysis and modelling

Douglas has held senior positions at a number of investment banks, most recently as a director of mergers & acquisitions at Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander. Douglas trained as a chartered accountant with KPMG and holds a first class degree in economics and finance from the University of Manchester where he was awarded two KPMG prizes, one Arthur Andersen prize and also graduated top of his year.

Marc Mostade, Technical Director

Marc is a chemical engineer with extensive experience of chemical modelling and practical application of UCG. After work at the University of Liege in Chemical Processes and Chemical Engineering he was co-ordinator of a research project in underground coal gasification in Thulin Belgium. He was then appointed Deputy Director-Technical of the second underground coal gasification pilot in El Tremedal Spain, a project joint funded by Belgium, Spain and the UK. After consulting work he became Product Manager in pumping products and Project and Production Manager in the first carbon nanotube producer in Europe.


Dr Matthew Turner, B.Sc (Hons) PhD, Senior Geologist

Matthew obtained a degree in Geology at Cardiff University and a PhD in Earth sciences also at Cardiff University. He is a specialist in geological modelling using geographical information systems (GIS) software. He has worked as a Geophysicist and Project Scientist for Terradat UK. He was then employed as a Senior Research Associate at Cardiff University undertaking a feasibility study on underground coal gasification in Wales. The study included a full geological appraisal using complex 3D visualisation techniques and modelling to produce the first ever three dimensional model of the South Wales Coalfield.

Dr Shaun Lavis, B.Sc (Hons) PhD, Senior Hydrogeologist

Shaun obtained a BSc in Exploration Geology (2:1 Hons) at Cardiff University, MSc n Geochemistry from the University of Leeds and a PhD from Cardiff University. He was a Freelance Geoscientist working for Terradat (UK) Limited and then joined WS Atkins as Environmental Scientist in 2006. He is a geoenvironmental scientist with professional experience hydrological risk assessments, geochemistry, geophysics and site investigation.

Edward Stanley, BEng (Hons), Computational Fluid Dynamics AnalystEdward obtained an undergraduate degree in Medical Engineering at Cardiff University and chose to specialise in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis. While undertaking his postgraduate studies at Cardiff, he was a teaching assistant, tutoring and supporting third year undergraduate students in Computational Fluid Dynamics.


Philippe Fievez, UCG Project Manager and Engineer

Philippe Fievez is a mining and nuclear civil engineer who has a postgraduate degree in management and a diploma in environmental methods. He was the Site Manager of the first underground coal gasification pilot in Europe and has held line positions with Schlumberger, Halliburton. His career has included positions as research & development and management, marketing and product management and as founder and CEO of a diamond tool business.

Henri Henquet, UCG Project Manager and Engineer

Henri Henquet was the Research Engineer involving the development and construction of laboratory systems for experiment in coal gasification. He was Project Engineer for the second underground coal gasification pilot in Europe and has worked on UCG projects since then. He is a Senior Project Engineer and continues to work in UCG.

Clean Coal Limited (US) Staff

Theodore Swindells, Chairman

Theodore H. Swindells has over 25 years experience in investment banking, venture capital, and corporate finance. Over the past five years, Mr.Swindells has focused on natural resource and clean energy investments including coal mining, precious metals extraction and processing, environmental remediation, fuel cells, and oil and gas equipment services. Mr. Swindells was a founding partner of Maroon Bells Capital Partners for ten years, managing numerous private equity investments in the global telecommunications industry. Mr. Swindells’ previous experience includes corporate finance and venture capital positions with Drexel Burnham Lambert, RubiconVentures, Hambrecht & Quist, Woodman Kirkpatrick & Gilbreath and Bank of America. Mr. Swindells holds a BA in economics from Claremont Men's College and an MBA in Finance from Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Business.

Edward Mooney, President

Mr. Mooney has over twenty years experience in all aspects of corporate development for publicly-held and privately-held enterprises, including mergers and acquisitions, corporate finance, strategic planning, business development, investor relations, corporate communications and corporate governance. Over the past ten years he has been an officer, director or advisor on five reverse-mergers from start-up through initial acquisitions and recruitment of professional industry management teams. He is also co-founder and chairman of the Global University for Lifelong Learning, a California not-for-profit organization focused on educational initiatives for developing nations. Mr. Mooney holds a Masters Degree in Education and a Bachelors Degree in Geography from the California State University System.

Clean Coal Limited (US) Staff

Business Development Advisory Team

Jody J. Sitkoski

Mr. Sitkoski brings 30 years of hands on business experience in mining & mineral exploration, due diligence, mine facility construction, power plant construction & maintenance and pipeline construction. With companies such as Bechtel, GE Power Systems, Flour Daniels, Cleveland Cliffs and Wisconsin Gas & Electric and the DOE. Mr. Sitkoski has experience with environmental technology processes

Daniel Carlson

Mr. Carlson is a Series 7 licensed broker and Investment Banker. Recently, Dan was working with Primary Capital where he was responsible for evaluating, marketing and working with Chinese companies seeking public listings in the US and financings through PIPE transactions. Mr. Carlson started his career on the Pacific Coast Stock Exchange where he worked for over 5 years, achieving the level of Specialist on the trading floor. Mr. Carlson graduated in 1989 from Tufts University with a degree in Economics.

Clean Coal Limited (China) Staff

Rob Abbanat, Managing Director, Clean Coal China

Mr. Abbanat has 13 years of experience in finance, business development, and operations of high-growth companies. He has spent the last three years living in China, where he has served as Managing Director of M1 Capital Group’s China organization. He has played a key role in structuring deals and securing financing internationally for multiple companies at various stages of development, He has earned numerous awards including SBA’s “Young Entrepreneur of the Year” and was inducted into Georgia Tech’s Council of Outstanding Young Engineering Alumni. Mr. Abbanat holds a Bachelors degree in physics from Boston College, a Masters in aerospace engineering from Georgia Tech, and an MBA from MIT. Rob is also the author of LETTER FROM SHANGHAI, a monthly column published in Private Equity International's PEI Asia magazine (www.letterfromshanghai.com). Rob's LETTERs offer an inside look at private equity, investment banking and the ever-changing economic and political landscapes within China.

Alex Pang, Business Development Manager, Clean Coal China

Mr. Pang brings to Clean Coal Ltd. extensive experience in corporate finance, project financing, direct investments, and portfolio investments. Mr. Pang has worked for some of the world's largest financial institutions, including HSBC Bank (China) and Citibank (China), as a financial manager providing investment advice, financial planning, financing, and other services for a wide range of customers. He is familiar with both the domestic and international capital markets, and has a successful track record of investments in China’s A-share markets as well as long-term management of QDII investments in Hong Kong, the United States, and Europe. Mr. Pang is well versed with the nuances of China’s capital markets, and possesses a deep understanding of China's fiscal, monetary, and industrial policies.

http://www.letterfromshanghai.com/

sc/p/2009_0037_v1 an introduction to. agenda introduction to clean coal ltd. – overview: who is...

Documents