Transcript Presentation Title

Raab Restructuring Roundtable
April 11, 2008
David Brewster, President
Safe Harbor Statement
Our presentation today, including the slides contained herein, contains forward-looking statements
within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements relate
to future events or to future financial performance, such as our projections about our future operating
results set forth herein, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that
may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially
different from any future results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements expressed or
implied by these forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking
statements by the use of words such as “may,” “could,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “seek,” “anticipate,”
“believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other
comparable terminology. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements
because they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that are, in some
cases, beyond our control and that could materially affect actual results, levels of activity,
performance, or achievements.
Other factors that could materially affect actual results, levels of activity, performance or
achievements can be found in our public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
including, without limitation, EnerNOC's Annual Report on Form 10-K as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 28, 2008. If any of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if our
underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may vary significantly from what we
projected. Any forward-looking statement you see or hear during this presentation reflect our current
views with respect to future events and is subject to these and other risks, uncertainties, and
assumptions relating to our operations, results of operations, growth strategy, and liquidity. We
assume no obligation to publicly update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason,
whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.
2
Agenda
About EnerNOC
Demand Resources in New England
Questions & Answers
3
EnerNOC and Demand Response
EnerNOC is like an “insurance provider”
for an aging electricity grid in North
America
We provide technology-enabled
demand response on a national scale
– 2,100 sites under management*
– 1,100 MW under management*
– Nearly 10% of the Fortune 500*
Assets roughly equivalent to 11 100MW peaking power plants, but without
the environmental impact
– We expect to manage the equivalent
of more than 20 100-MW peaking
power plants by year-end 2008
Active EnerNOC DR markets
EnerNOC Office
In addition to Demand Response,
EnerNOC offers a broad suite of energy
management solutions
*As of 12/31/07
4
Energy Network Operations Center
Our Network Operations Center (NOC) features automated DR capabilities
to ensure that curtailment happens quickly, efficiently, and consistently for both
utility and C&I customers
5
Proprietary Technology Network
EnerNOC bridges the supply side and demand side through scalable
technology to aggregate guaranteed reductions in demand
Supply
Demand
6
Large, Untapped Market Opportunity
5-10% of peak demand can be met by demand
response (1)
Peaking Power Plants Must Be QuickStarting, Reliable, and Clean
Estimated market size today as much as
~76GW (2)
– Equivalent to ~760 100-MW peaking power
plants
Quick
Starting
(‘Dispatchable’)
Estimated US market size by 2030: ~120GW (3)
Reliable
Economics of Demand Response
DR
Coal, Nuclear
– 100-MW peaker = ~$60-100mm CapEx
– 100-MW DR network = $900,000 CapEx
– Demand response can offset ~$46 - $76 BN
of capital infrastructure costs
Clean
Renewable Resources
(e.g. wind, wave)
(1) EnerNOC estimates & FERC reports
(2) Includes US regions where Demand Response currently is part of the market as well as those where it is not
(3) Source: Brattle Group Research
7
Demand Resources in New England’s FCM
Auction held in February 2008 for delivery June 2010 – May 2011
2,554 MW Demand Resources; 30,865 MW of Supply Resources
LOAD ZONE
Distributed
Generation
Fossil Fuel
Distributed
Generation
Renewable
Energy
Efficiency
RTDR & Load
Management
RTEG
Total Cleared MW
CT
17.426
0.000
200.101
287.995
342.126
847.648
ME
0.000
0.000
26.071
210.493
36.622
273.186
NEMA
0.169
0.000
133.970
179.715
162.581
476.435
NH
8.641
0.000
35.186
30.474
44.178
118.479
RI
0.000
0.000
45.591
46.784
72.998
165.373
SEMA
5.590
0.168
81.598
70.127
86.209
243.692
VT
0.000
0.000
57.692
23.609
20.346
101.647
West/Central Mass (WCMA)
14.483
0.000
74.334
128.521
109.764
327.102
Grand Total
46.309
0.168
654.543
977.718
874.824
2553.562
Source: ISO-NE.
8
Third-Parties in New England’s FCM
61% of Demand Resources represented through “Merchant”
market participants (i.e., non-utility, non-government)
Participant
Type
Distributed
Generation
Fossil Fuel
Distributed
Generation
Renewable
Energy
Efficiency
RTDR & Load
Management
RTEG
Total Cleared MW
Merchant
2.638
0
61.238
792.506
695.27
1551.654
Quasi Gov
26.245
0.168
95.34
0
0
121.753
Utility
17.426
0
497.965
185.212
179.55
880.155
Grand Total
46.309
0.168
654.543
977.718
874.82
2553.562
Source: ISO-NE.
9
FCM Event Triggers for Demand Resources
10
The State of ISO/RTO DR Markets
Trends
New forward capacity markets allow demand resources to participate
alongside supply resources. Changes the playing field, especially for
energy efficiency.
In addition to capacity markets, demand response is eligible to
participate in an increasing number of market-based ancillary services
and energy markets nationwide.
PJM is the most developed ISO/RTO in terms of having existing
market-based opportunities for demand response to provide capacity,
energy, and ancillary services.
EnerNOC’s position: demand response should be fully integrated in all
wholesale market structures.
11