© 2016 CO2 Solutions Inc. and CO2 Solution Technologies Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE AND BENEFICIAL REUSELouis Fradette, Sylvain Lefebvre, Jonathan Carley

October 14, 2016

2

Forward Looking Statements

All statements in this presentation that are other than statements of historical facts are forward-lookingstatements which contain our current expectations about our future results. Forward-looking statementsinvolve numerous risks and uncertainties. We have attempted to identify any forward-looking statements byusing words such as “anticipates”, “believes”, “could”, “expects”, “intends”, “may”, “should” and othersimilar expressions.

Although we believe that the expectations reflected in all of our forward-looking statements are reasonable,we can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. A number of factors may affect ourfuture results and may cause those results to differ materially from those indicated in any forward-lookingstatements made by us or on our behalf. Such factors include our early stage of technology development;our need for capital to finance necessary research and product development; our ability to attract and retainkey employees and strategic partners; our ability to achieve and maintain profitability; fluctuations in thetrading price and volume of our stock; competition from other providers of similar products and services;and other unanticipated future events and conditions. For further information concerning risks anduncertainties that may affect our future results, please review the disclosures as may be contained fromtime to time in our filings with SEDAR. Other than as required by applicable securities laws, we undertake noobligation to publicly update or revise any of our forward-looking statements, whether as a result ofchanged circumstances, new information, future events, or for any other reason occurring after the date ofthis presentation. This presentation does not constitute an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to buy

securities in any jurisdiction.

3

« State-of-the-art »: Boundary Dam

SaskPower Admits to

Problems at First “Full-Scale”

Carbon Capture Project at

Boundary Dam Plant

- Power Magazine, Nov 30 2015

4

Existing, Conventional Solutions

• High costs• High operating costs due to steam-fed

regeneration requirement

• $60-90/tonne of CO2 for flue gas application(1,2)

• Operational and environmental

problems(5)

• Degradation and stability issues

• Extensive flue gas pre-treatment required

• Toxic aerosol emissions

• Solvent losses

• Generation of waste products

Sources:

1) http://ccemc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/C101033-HTC-DEV-JA-03-001-1-R1-+-FEED-REPORT-CCEMC.pdf, Page 19 (~$70/tonne cost)

2) https://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Events/2014/2014%20NETL%20CO2%20Capture/A-Bhown-EPRI-CO2-Capture-RD-EPRI.pdf, Page 6

3) http://www.ai-ees.ca/media/10958/2010_barriers_to_co2_eor_report_final_june4-13.pdf, Page 44

4) http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/Org/pdfs/CCS_Implementation.pdf, Page 10

5) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583614001777

5

Life Cycle Analysis - MEA

5

Impact % Change vs

no capture

Global warming −74

Terrestrial acidification -13

Freshwater eutrophication 136

Marine eutrophication 43

Photochemical oxidant formation 27

Participate matter formation -7

Human toxicity 51

Terrestrial ecotoxicity 114

Fresh water ecotoxicity 205

Marine ecotoxicity 88

Running CO2 capture with MEA (or any amine) is detrimental to the planet

- 1.6 kg of MEA consumed/ton of CO2 captured

Singh, B., A. H. Strømman, et E. G. Hertwich. «Comparative life cycle environmental assessment of CCS technologies.» International Journal of

Greenhouse Gas Control, 2011: pp911-921.

6

Typical Amine Capture Process

• High-temperature stripping (>120ᵒC) requires use of high-grade steam

7

CO2 Solutions’ Process – An ‘Industrial Lung’

LOW-GRADE

HEAT FOR

REGENERATION

ENERGY

LOW COST, NON-

TOXIC CARBONATE

SOLVENT

STANDARD GAS

TREATMENT

EQUIPMENT

8

CO2 Solutions’ Process – An ‘Industrial Lung’

NO

AEROSOLS

NO

TOXIC

WASTES

No waterwash No filter

No reclaimer

No solvent

makeup

9

2015: EERC Pilot Testing Program

• Three full weeks of testing in December 2014 and January 2015

• Packed column absorber and stripper• Stripper operated under partial vacuum

• Heat source was hot water from domestic water heaters• Steam never used

• Natural gas and coal flue gases

• Solvents: Neat K2CO3 and Formulated Carbonate

• Proprietary CO2 Solutions 1T1 enzyme• Free and immobilized

10

2015: CO2 Capture <$40/tonne was Realistic

• Pilot testing at EERC

demonstrated:• Efficient use of nil-value power plant heat in

the 70-90°C range for solvent regeneration

• Electrical parasitic load of 0.2 GJ/tonne for

reduced pressure

• Change of Paradigm• Majority of the stripping heat from outside of

the steam cycle in power plants• First proof of feasibility

• Cost of capture incl. compression

<$40/tonne

11

2015: Techno-Economics Results – EERC

• Net power plant efficiency

-3.5-3.5

-10.9

DOE Case 11 DOE Case 12 CO2 Solutions

12

2015: Techno-Economics Results – EERC (2)

• Comparison at 550 MW Net Power output

• Capture and compression to 2250 psi

DOE Case 11 CO2

Solutions

No Capture Capture

Gross Turbine Power, MW 580 637

Cost of Electricity, $/MWh $ 58.91 $ 82.31

Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh $ 74.47 $ 104.38

CO2 Capture Cost, $/tonne - $ 39.30

DOE 2025 goal is met at <40$

13

2015: Techno-Economics Results – EERC (3)

• Impact of low grade heat

• Low grade heat reuse leads to• Significantly less CO2 to capture and to sequester

• Smaller power plant

• Smaller capture unit

Extra Fuel relative to Case 11 - +38.2% +9.7%

CO2 Generated (Mt/y) 4.2 5.89 4.67

CO2 Captured (Mt/y) - 5.30 4.20

CO2 to atmosphere (Mt/y) 4.2 0.59 0.47

DOE Case 11 DOE Case 12CO

Solutions

CO2

Solutions

$

14

2015: Techno-Economics Results – EERC (3)

• Impact of low grade heat

• Low grade heat reuse leads to• Significantly less CO2 to capture and to sequester

• Smaller power plant

• Smaller capture unit

Extra Fuel relative to Case 11 - +38.2% +9.7%

CO2 Generated (Mt/y) 4.2 5.89 4.67

CO2 Captured (Mt/y) - 5.30 4.20

CO2 to atmosphere (Mt/y) 4.2 0.59 0.47

DOE Case 11 DOE Case 12CO

Solutions

CO2

Solutions

Impacts

15

10 t/d Demonstration - Results

• 5 times less enzyme than the design basis

• CO2 produced is at 99.95%+ purity

• No solvent degradation observed

• No solvent makeup required

• No toxic waste products generated• Solvent sent to the municipal sewer

• Operation with day shift operators only• Stable process

• Mass and energy balances validated by 3rd party (Tetratech Inc.)

16

• Electrical consumption of main components

extrapolated from pilot operation

• Reboiler heat (hot water): 3.2 to 3.6 GJ/tonne

Consumption

(GJ/t)

Vacuum (0.3 to 2 bara) 0.24

Flue gas blower 0.05

Lean/Rich solvent pumps 0.06

Total 0.35

10 t/d Demonstration - Results (2)

17

CO2 Capture <$40/tonne is Even More Realistic

• Base case• Full-size OTSG unit (for in-situ oil production)

• Natural gas combustion

• 1250 tonnes CO2/day

• 116 M$ Capital investment

• Performance data validated by Tetratech Inc.

• Cost of capture (before compression)

($/t CO2)

Fixed Costs 6.9

Variable costs 12.6

Total Capital Req. 8.5

Total 28.0

18

LCA – Amines vs Carbonates

CO2 Solutions’ process

• No extra power required vs others => improvements in Energy-related impacts

• Chemistry similar to carbonates => retains excellent chemistry performance

Energy

demand

Solvent

chemistry

Grant, T., C. Anderson, B. Hooper. « Comparative life cycle assessment of potassium carbonate and mono-ethanolamine solvents for CO2 captured from post

combustion flue gases », International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2014: V28, pp35–44.

19

Next: Commercial Progress – Capture and Reuse

<2014

Lab and

Bench-Scale:

0.5tpd

2014-2015

Pilot:

1tpd

2015

Demonstration:

10tpd

2016+

Commercial:

10-300tpd; $37M

CAPEX in Canadatpd = metric tonnes CO2 captured per day

30 tpd project, 7.4 M$:- 2.4 M$ from SDTC

- 3.0 M$ from Technoclimat

(granted)

300 tpd, 30 M$- 15 M$ from CCEMC

(granted)

…

30 tpd project, 7.4 M$:- 2.4 M$ from SDTC

- 3.0 M$ from Technoclimat

(granted)

300 tpd, 30 M$- 15 M$ from CCEMC

(granted)

…

20

CO2 Capture

3-30%

99%+

Renewable, Value-

Added Products

Next: Capture and CO2 Reuse Processes

“Valorisation Carbone Québec”

CO2 Conversion/Reuse

Partners

Industry

• $15M from Government of Quebec for development and demonstration

21

Valorisation Carbone Québec

• GoQ objective• Demonstrate feasibility of combining renewable power with CO2 capture to

reduce emissions and create value

• Montreal East retained location

• 70 conversion technologies identified• Most advanced processes spotted

• Polymers

• Chemicals

• Food (proteins)

• Ranking of candidates• LCA

• Cost of conversion

• Market size

• Potential for creating « mass cycles »

21

22

Robust Patent Portfolio

46 ISSUED

BROAD PATENT PORTFOLIO FOR USE OF

CARBONIC ANHYDRASE IN CANADA, U.S., EU,

CHINA, AUSTRALIA AND OTHER MARKETS

37 PENDING*

vs. 13 and 19 respectively in 2008

*as at June 30, 2015

Areas of Carbonic

AnhydraseCO2 Capture Application

SOLVENTSAmines

Carbonates

Amino Acids

Combinations

PROCESSESPacked Tower

Spray Scrubber

Bubble Column

Universal

INDUSTRIAL SECTORSPower

Steam

‘Drop-in’ Applications

ENZYME UTILIZATIONSoluble

Particle-Based

Analogs

23

Summary

• Process performance confirmed• Enzyme stable in process

• No toxic waste generation

• No aerosol issues

• No solvent degradation

• Solvent

• Can be eliminated in standard water treatment plant

• Can be converted into fertilizers when spent

• Capture cost confirmed at the 10 tpd scale• <40$/tonne compressed to 2250 psi

• Commercialization on its way• 30 tpd project

• >100 tpd project

• Carbon cycle project

© 2016 CO2 Solutions Inc. and CO2 Solution Technologies Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

THANK YOUDr. Louis Fradette,

Sr. VP Process Engineering & CTO

louis.fradette@co2solutions.com; 418-842-3456

www.co2solutions.com