Clean Energy with Plasma Gasification

Atlantic County Bio-Energy Facility

ACUA & NRG Partnership

December 3, 2010 Safe Harbor Statement

This Presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions and typically can be identified by the use of words such as “expect,” “estimate,” “should,” “anticipate,” “forecast,” “plan,” “guidance,” “believe,” “will” and similar terms. Although NRG believes that these expectations are reasonable, it can give no assurance that these expectations will prove to have been correct, and actual results may vary materially. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated above include, among others, general economic conditions, hazards customary in the power industry, weather conditions, competition in wholesale power markets, the volatility of energy and fuel prices, failure of customers to perform under contracts, changes in the wholesale power markets, changes in government regulation of markets and of environmental emissions, the condition of capital markets generally, adverse results in current and future litigation, failure to identify or successfully implement acquisitions and repowerings, and the inability to implement value enhancing improvements to plant operations and companywide processes.

NRG undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The foregoing review of factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements included in this Presentation should be considered in connection with information regarding risks and uncertainties that may affect NRG's future results included in NRG's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission at www.sec.gov.

1 Today’s Speaker

Fred Rogers Buck Rogers 2 NRG Energy, Inc.

Finalist for 3 Platt’s Awards (2010) Added to S&P 500 (2010) Fortune 500 -- #12 Fastest Growing Company (2009) Fortune 500 -- Top 10% for “Best Investment” (2008) Platt’s Energy Company of the Year (2007) Platt’s Industry Leader of the Year (2007)

Headquartered in Princeton, NJ Generating Capacity ~ 26,000 MW NYSE : NRG Market Cap ~ $5 billion 4,600 Employees Worldwide

NRG: Leading Competitive Energy Business 3 NRG Portfolio Thermal

STEAM, 833 MW, 71%

STEAM Northeast

CHILLED GAS WATER, 1,299 Western COAL, 16 236 MW, MW MW, 1% 20% COAL 19% GAS, 100 1,681 OIL GAS 3,926 MW, 8% MW 2,130 24% MW MW 57% SOLAR 99% 20 MW <1% NUCLEAR South Central 1,176MW STEAM 5% 833 MW Texas 3% SOLAR 21MW GAS 0% 1,356 COAL MW 1,496 48% OIL International COAL MW 3,826 MW GAS 8,374 MW 52% 15% COOLING 5,642 MW 33% 49% 236 MW COAL 1%

COAL 4,177 MW Gas Coal WIND 37% 448 MW 10,526 MW 1,005 MW WIND 2% 41% 448 MW 4% NUCLEA R NRG 1,176 MW 10% MW data as of September 30, 2010 80% of people live within 60 miles of the coast. 4 Atlantic County Bio-Energy Project (Mr. Rodgers Perspective)

Two Phases Phase I ƒ Permitting Boiler ST 5 MW ƒ Minimize Disruption to ACUA ƒ Minimize Capex 150 TPD ƒ US Reference Plant for MSW ƒ Will Facilitate Phase II Permitting

Phase II ƒ Evolution – Simple Cycle to GT Combined Cycle ST ƒ Construction Revenue for Phase I 200 TPD ƒ Devote Phase I Gasifier to High GT 60 MW Value Specialty Waste ƒ DOE Loan Guarantee Eligible ST

GT

850 TPD 5 Raison d’Etre

1. NRG Social Responsibility 2. NRG Strategy 3. Progressive Partner 4. Good Site 5. Sound Technology 6. Good Environmental Story 7. Good Economic Story 8. Supports NJ EMP

6 NRG Social Responsibility

Strategic Approach Route Benefits

Act as a resource to public Help Shape policy makers Entering coalitions with key Federal greenhouse gas Policy stakeholders (e.g. U.S. legislation that drives Climate Action Partnership change but is pragmatic (USCAP)

Nuclear Attractive baseload with no carbon

Carbon Sequestering Post combustion carbon capture

On-Shore Wind No fuel cost; no carbon emissions Technology Off-Shore Wind

(Our Green Lineup) Solar (CSP) No fuel cost; no carbon emissions Solar (Photovoltaic)

Plasma Gasification Greenfield Waste-to-Energy; Retrofit waste incinerators

CHP+ NRGSM High efficiency Integrate with green technology

EV Charging Stations No carbon emissions

Proactive Approach 7 NRG Strategy

NRG 2003 NRG Today1 NRG Tomorrow2

Retail Renewables Oil Oil Other Repowering Other Nuclear projects Gas Gas Nuclear Renewables STP 3&4 Wholesale Coal Coal Electric Car and Other

…A highly leveraged, capital …A competitive energy company …An energy provider intense, fossil fuel burning power tied to capital, carbon and increasingly driven by generator commodity (natural gas) prices services, systems and the sun

1Based on 2009 results 2Not intended as guidance

8 Progressive Partner - ACUA

ƒ Solar

ƒ Wind Power 25% of Rowan’s Electricity Comes From Wind Power ƒ Landfill Gas ƒ Recycling ƒ Composting ƒ CNG / Bio-Diesel ƒ Community Outreach ƒ Recommended by Rowan University

9 Good Site

ƒ Up to 25 Acres within the existing ACUA facility ƒ Avoids wetlands and endangered species areas ƒ Add waste processing and storage to existing tipping floor building ƒ Gasification, syngas clean-up and power generation systems are constructed within enclosed buildings ƒ No change to existing truck traffic ƒ No change to 6-day waste collection ƒ 24/7 waste processing and power generation

10 Sound Technology

ƒ Westinghouse developed Plasma Technology during a 30 year period and over $100 million R&D

¾ Initially for high temperature research – NASA re-entry tiles – Gas turbine blade coatings ¾ Expanded to metal melting in 1980s ¾ Tested for waste processing in 1990s ¾ Proven in waste processing in 1990s ¾ Commercial Facilities in 2000s

ƒ Alter Nrg continues to invest in WPC Test Facility product development. Madison, PA

* Westinghouse Plasma Corp. Staff

Impressive Lineage Technology Based on a History of Successes 11 Good Environmental Story

(1) 8,899 192.06 200 Comparison of WTE Emissions 9,000 Pounds of CO2 Emissions 180 8,000 per MWh of Electricity Produced 160 7,000 140 Gasification / MWH 6,000 Incineration 2 120 5,000

Waste Processed 94.60 Landfill (1) 100 4,000 2,988 68.00 (1) 80 3,000 2,105 53.00 (2) 1,419 (1) 60 Pounds of CO 2,000 1,135 31.05 40 1,000 17.10 9.00 20 6.30 5.30 0 gram/metric ton of Landfill Gas MSW Landfill Gas MSW Natural Gas 0 Released Incineration Combusted Plasma NOx SO2 PM Source: Integra Energy Consulting Source: (1) EPA Documents: www.epa.gov (2) Complete conversion of Carbon to CO2; MSW material & heat balance, Westinghouse Plasma Corp.

Plasma Gasification produces ƒ Landfills produce methane = 21 x CO2 lower emissions than other ¾Gasification better than incineration Waste-to-Energy technologies ¾Incineration better than methane flare ¾Methane flare better than landfill

Plasma Gasification is a Cleaner Technology 12 Good Economic Story

Job Creation ƒ 150 - 200 Construction Jobs ƒ 50 Full-Time Operations and Maintenance Jobs ƒ Safe Work Environment ƒ Family Supporting Wages

Economics ƒ Stabilizes Tipping Fees ƒ Produces Green Energy and Other Marketable Products ƒ Supports the Atlantic County Waste Hauler Industry ƒ No Capital Investment by Atlantic County or the State of NJ ƒ Supports Long-Term Waste Disposal Plan Helps ACUA ƒ Extends Landfill Capacity ƒ Reduces Landfill Costs ƒ Promotes Recycling ƒ Enhances Bird and Odor Control

Economic Development • Energy • Environment 13 NJ Energy Master Plan

Demand Side: Goal 1: Maximize the State’s energy Conservation and energy efficiency to achieve reductions in energy consumption of at least 20% by 2020.

Goal 2: Reduce peak demand for electricity by 5,700 MW by 2020. (Approximately 8,000 NJ Homes) Supply Side:

Goal 3: Meet 22.5% of the State’s electricity needs from renewable sources.

Goal 4: Develop new low carbon emitting, efficient power plants and close the gap between the supply and demand of electricity.

Goal 5: Invest in innovative clean energy technologies and businesses to stimulate the industry’s growth in New Jersey.

Exceeds Goals from First Day of Operation 14 Gasification = Thermal Conversion

4 States of Matter

Solid Liquid Gas Plasma

Ice Water Steam Sun

32oF 49.5oF 212oF 10,000oF +

o ACYN4 100oC 5,530oC + 0 C WTMD Physical Changes Based on Temperature 15 Gasification Is Better Than Incineration

Why Plasma Gasification Incineration

Conversion at Destruction at Higher Temperature 3,000oF to 3,600oF 1,500oF to 2,500oF

All organic matter Organic matter Broader feedstock (MSW, tires, medical, (some special waste options bio-waste, sludge) prohibited)

More Energy (~50%) 820 kWh / ton MSW 540 kWh / ton MSW

Fewer emissions and Removed from Syngas Removed from impurities (particulates, prior to combustion combustion exhaust mercury, sulfur)

Fewer residuals Vitreous Slag Ash Safer residuals 1% to 5% by vol. 10% to 20% by vol. Easier to dispose

Gasification is NOT Incineration 16 Plasma: The 4th State of Matter

What is plasma? ƒ An electrically charged gas (superheated air). ƒ Capable of temperatures exceeding 13,000°F. ƒ Examples in nature are lightning and the Sun. What is plasma gasification? ƒ Break down of organic materials (MSW) into simpler molecular structures using extremely hot air. ƒ Converts all organic materials into gaseous fuel. What is the end product?

ƒ Synthesis Gas - “Syngas” – consisting of H2 + CO. ƒ Syngas, similar to natural gas, can be used as fuel to generate electricity or steam. What are the advantages? ƒ An efficient and environmentally responsible process to convert low value blended feedstock (MSW) to high value gaseous fuel to produce electricity. Waste conversion: Gasification (>95%); Incineration (~80%) Energy capture: Gasification (~60%); Incineration (~39%) 1

1) Knox, Andrew An Overview of Incineration and EWF Technology as Applied to the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), University of Western Ontario. Plasma is Controlled Lightning February 2005 17 Plasma Gasification is NOT Incineration

Plasma Gasification Incineration ƒ Any type of waste, no separating ƒ Must separate unwanted waste ƒ Uses Minimum Oxygen ƒ Uses Excess Oxygen ƒ No open flame ƒ Open flame ƒ Disassociation at 3,600oF ƒ Combustion at 1,500oF to 2,500oF

Reactions Reactions Input CO + H2O CO2 + H2 C + O2 CO2 Input MSW } 2C + O2 2CO 2H + O 2H O MSW 2 2 2 }C + CO2 2CO Output C + H2O CO + H2

Output Heat Heat + Gaseous Fuel (Syngas) ƒ Energy is spent after the reaction ƒ Syngas contains potential energy Different Chemical Reactions 18 Plasma Gasification DVD

19 Plasma Torch System

Electricity Plume of Superheated Air Not a Flame

Air or Oxygen Plasma (10,000oF)

Plasma Torch Features ƒ High thermal efficiency ƒ Operation on air or oxygen ƒ Rugged design used in steel mills, foundries and power generation

Robust Heat Source 20 Operating Conditions

ƒ Foundry Cupola Design Feedstock in ~ 1,650oF – 2,000oF ƒ Heat Resistant Refractory (Syngas Outlet) ƒ 4 to 6 Plasma Torches ƒ Feedstock (500-750 tpd) ƒ Organic Materials Convert to Syngas, exits at top ƒ Inorganic Materials Melt to Slag - exits at bottom

ƒ Organic material dissociates into

elemental structures, e.g.; H2, C. ƒ Do not recombine into complex Operates at structures, e.g.; Furan, Dioxin Atmospheric Pressure

~ 3,600oF Conversion Temperature

9,000oF – 12,600oF (Plasma Plume at Torch) Coke Bed (retains heat) Uses 2 – 5% of energy produced ~ 3,000oF (Molten Slag Outlet)

Single-Stage, Non-Pressurized Gasifier 21 Process Flow: Combined Cycle

Feed Gasification Syngas Clean-Up Power Generation Processing Emerg. Flare Gas Turbine Generator MSW Used Tires Air C&D Wood Supply Blowers

Cooling Air Syngas Plasma & Mercury H2S

Raw Preheater Blower Exhaust Coke (Bed) Quenching Removal Removal Gasification Syngas Limestone Reactor

Heated Heat Air Sulfur Recovery

Water Return Steam

Torch Quench Water Generator Compressed Air Water Treatment / Cooling

Slag Steam Makeup Water Turbine Generator Metal Recovery & Recycle Steam Condensate Construction Aggregate

Integration of Four Proven Technologies 22 Atlantic County Bio-Energy Project (Buck Rodgers Perspective)

Phase I One gasifier (W-15) Air Blown (oxygen short term) Boiler ST 5 MW Environmental Clean-up System Boiler and Steam Turbine 150 TPD 150 TPD MSW 5 MW

Phase II Additional, larger gasifier (G-65) GT Oxygen Blown 200 ST Environmental Clean-up System TPD Increase to full capacity GT 60 MW 3 Gas Turbines Combined ST 2 Steam Turbines } Cycle 1050 TPD GT 60 MW 850 TPD 23 Waste Generated Feedstocks

MSW Tires ~ 5,000 Btu/lb ~ 13,000 Btu/lb

Greenwood Biomass C&D Wood ~ 4,500 Btu/lb ~ 6,000 Btu/lb

Choice of Dedicated or Mixed Feedstocks 24 Pre-Combustion Clean-up

ƒ Particulate Matter and Dust Removal Baghouse

¾ Removes (99%)of Particulate Matter and Dust ¾ Recirculates PM back through gasifier

ƒ Mercury Removal by Carbon Filtration (95%) Carbon Filter Bed

Shell ƒ Syngas Desulfurization Paques ¾ Converts Hydrogen Sulfide to Elemental Sulfur

¾ Removes 95% of Sulfur ¾ Recovered Sulfur has Beneficial Use as Fertilizer

More Efficient than Post-Combustion Clean-up 25 Emissions: Achieves RPS on Day 1

RPS Timelines

Federal (Waxman) 20% by 2020 Federal (Bingaman) 15% by 2020 NJ 22.5% by 2020

Atlantic County 56%* on Day 1 (2015) Bio-Energy Facility • 5 years ahead of curve

• 33% above the bar

* U.S. Dept. of Energy – Energy Information Administration, Methodology for Allocating Municipal Solid Waste to Biogenic and Non-Biogenic Energy (May 2007)

26 Plasma Slows Landfill Development

TECHNOLOGY RESIDUE DISPOSAL

Water-cooled slag

Recycle

Plasma Gasifier

Municipal Solid Waste Landfill

Incinerator

Less Residue. Safer Residue 27 Recycle Inert Vitrified Slag

US EPA Approved For: ƒ Roadbed Aggregate

ƒ Sandblasting Grit

ƒ Recycled Glass Cullet

ƒ Architectural Tile Manufacture

ƒ Glass Fiber Rock (Rock Wool Insulation) Water Cooled Slag ƒ Roofing Granules (Shingle Manufacture)

ƒ Passes the Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure

By-Product Also Has Value 28 NJ Potential Energy

New Jersey could have generated 1,124 MW of power in 2007

ƒ The large proportion of waste-based biomass in the state supports the recommendation that NJ pursue development of an energy-from-waste industry.

ƒ Gasification is suitable for municipal wastes, and could offer lower emissions than conven- tional incineration.

ƒ Conversion of solid waste to clean energy could become the major source of renewable energy to help NJ meet its goal of 22.5% renewable energy by 2020.

ƒ Compare: PSE&G’s Hudson Coal Plant 1,246 MW.

ƒ Rutgers Report: http://njaes.rutgers.edu/bioenergy/njaes-biomass-assessment-finalreport.pdf

29 Westinghouse Plasma Milestones

1987 2002 PLASMA FIRED CUPOLA 1ST COMMERCIAL SCALE Melt iron fines PLASMA GASIFIER General Motors; Defiance, Ohio Hitachi Metals, Mihama-Mikata, Japan

1995 2008 2010 HAZ MAT INCINERATOR ASH WORLD’S LARGEST FACILITY VITRIFICATION PLASMA HAZ MAT FACILITY Nagpur, India – IHI; Kinuura, Japan under Pune, India – construction commissioned early 2009

1999 2009 PLASMA GASIFICATION OF SYNGAS TO 2010 MSW ETHANOL BIOMASS-TO- ENERGY Hitachi Metals; Yoshi, Japan - Coskata FACILITY commissioned in 1999 Sept. 2009 Wuhan, China – 1989 2003 under VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL LARGEST PLASMA construction APPLICATIONS GASIFIER FOR MSW Over 500,000 hours of Eco-Valley; industrial use Utashinai, Japan

Proven Technology Based On A History of Success 30 Don’t Just Take Our Word

“One technology which potentially can use various types of waste, produce electricity and hydrogen without emitting dioxin, furan and mercury, is plasma arc technology. Municipalities can install a plasma arc facility which will eliminate land filling…” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency “Producing ultra-clean energy from gasification is the most environmentally attractive alternative to utilize solid fuels, including coal.” U.S. Department of Energy

“These emissions will be substantially lower than traditional mass burn or refuse derived fuel processes commonly used in the waste to energy industry.” ENSR / AECOM

Recognized as a “Clean” Technology 31 Questions?

NRG Energy, Inc. 211 Carnegie Center Princeton, NJ 08540 (609) 524-4500 [email protected] www.nrgenergy.com Add'l Info

Additional Information www.westinghouse-plasma.com Gasification Technology Council www.gasification.org http://www.nrgenergy.com/assets/video/p lasma/plasma-gasification-msw.html Thank You

32 Reference Facilities

33 Reference Facilities

Eco Valley Utashinai ƒ Operational since April 2003 ƒ Design MSW capacity: 240 tpd ƒ Actual processing: MSW 83 tpd ASR 83 tpd ƒ Gross Power: 8 MW

Mihama-Mikata ƒ Operational since March 2003 ƒ Design MSW capacity: 24 tpd ƒ Actual processing: MSW 80 tpd Waste Water Sludge 4 tpd ƒ Gross Power: Steam for waste water processing plant

MSW Application 34 Additional Reference Facilities

• General Motors – Defiance, Ohio ¾ Melt scrap metal to form engine blocks ¾ Same WPC torches operating since 1989 ¾ No Power generation

• ALCAN, Jonquiere, Canada ¾ Aluminum Dross Recovery Furnace ¾ Commissioned in 1992 ¾ Material quality increased and waste reduced

• Two facilities in India - Pune (2008) & Nagpur (2010) ¾ Plasma waste vitrification plants ¾ Electricity output (Boiler and Steam Turbine) ¾ Process 72 tons/day hazardous waste (each plant)

Plasma Torches Used in Specialty Applications 35