HUG is a new good, which has never been seen before; it substantially deviates from any other good or service produced before. Over the past decades, no major breakthroughs have occurred in the basic machinery.

In today's world, manufacturers need to invest significant resources in research and development to meet technology advance and market competition.

Large hydropower plants may have considerable impact on environmental and social economic aspects at regional level. They are running out of possible locations. Small hydro offers the only efficient solution to our hydro electric crises:

HUG Teeth: Financial Benefits

1. Reducing your cost per mega watt hour at the rate of $5.46/MWh by 360% on the low side, by 1,100% on the high side. Generating costs usually range from $20/MWh to $60/MWh.

2. Increasing your Energy Availability Factor (power plant performance) by the same range. O&M costs are estimated between 1.5 and 2.5% of investment cost per year.

3. Lowering your Cost of Construction: In 2009, Hydro-Quebec (Canada) was permitted to build a number of hydro

projects totaling 4500 MW, with a total price of US$ 23, which is $5.1millon/MW.

Your Cost of Construction for a 100 MW project is $88.5 million or .88 million/MW, which is 22% of the typical average cost of $4000/kW.

4. Increasing your Return on Investment:

In Quebec, the small $7.2 million project (6.7 MW) has a high return on investment. At the 80% utilization rate, 47,000 MWh [x $79/MWh] = $3,700,000: ROI = 51%/yr.

Similarly, the larger $88.5 million project (100 MW) produces 700,800 MWh [x $79/MWh (Quebec)] = $55,360,000: ROI = 63%/yr.

Ontario has a higher guaranteed price called FIT. The Annual Return on Investment: (using $131/MWh x 47,000 MWh) = $6,160,000: ROI = 85%

The larger 100 MW project has a higher return on investment. Similarly, the Annual Return on Investment: (Ontario FIT) (700,800 MWh x $131/MWh) is $91,800,000 = 104%/yr.

In the New England central/western Massachusetts zone, the average value of energy for this year to date (June 2010) is around US$48/MWh.

5. Lowering your Generation Costs: these are in the range for small hydro of $45–120/MWh with an average of $83/MWh. There are many ideal sites, which are close to the existing Electric Power Converter/Generators, thereby reducing these costs by 40%.

6. Allowing you to tap into Green Technology Government Funding & Tax Rebates:

The incentive programs are endless: from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation to ecoENERGY Technology Initiatives.

The $250 million Targeted Investment Program is aimed to strengthen economic foundations of native communities. Assistance of up to 100% of total eligible costs for non-commercial projects (like this Pilot Project). This takes the risk away from any initial investment. A Private Public Partnership set up to administer the project will guarantee a 10% annual return after taxes on money invested by INAC (Indian and Native Affairs Canada)

The Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) program provide an investment tax credit (ITC) of 35%.

7. Providing a faster return on investment: your construction time ranges between 10 and 18 months, while large hydro projects last as long as 18 to 96 months.

8. Creating approximately 18 million in new revenue period over three years-- with an investment of seven million dollars over the same time frame; netting you eleven million in new money, yet this investment can be sold as a Private Public Partnership, earning a pre-tax return of10% for decades.

9. Providing a High Turnover: The Technical lifetime factor is an average of 30 years. This type of investment can be sold to pension funds for a much high return, because they always seek out long term security.

10. Providing extra revenue from the upcoming sale of carbon credits: those companies, which exceed the emission limits, will soon be forced to buy $284,000 worth of carbon credits for every 1 MW of new clean energy.

11. Earning Water Export Revenue: using the technology of the HUG Siphon System to move water south and partnering with pipeline companies.

12.The R&D efforts are driven by the prospect of 'temporarily' earning monopoly profits.

13. The risk factor is low because the initial Prototype & Feasibility Study of the HUG, the Helical Turbine System costs only $752,600.

This 0.24 MW power cell line has an admirable cost recovery of $65,350/yr. The Return on Investment: 17.5%/yr.

Net Benefits of HUG in its Diverse Role

Waterfall Hydro

Presently no new patents exist to capture energy from small waterfalls without extensive use of a dam, which limits fish migration.

A Total Power Output Estimate of 20 Ontario Waterfalls: 335.6 MW

1.25MW/Turbine (9 turbines: 11.32 MW)

Rapids Hydro

Presently no patents exist to capture energy from rapids without a dam. Redirecting rivers to a water basin, which funnels into a new set of rapids

requires no dam.

Canada has tremendous potential for small hydro development with more than 5500 identified sites (11,000 MW), which require no dams or barrages.

The global technical potential of small hydropower is estimated between 150,000 and 200,000 MW.

Tidal Hydro

Presently none of pilot project stage are commercially viable

Average kinetic power density of 1 kW/m2 is the threshold for economic viability (Bedard et al. 2006).

In the Bay of Fundy, it was estimated that extracting the maximum of 7 gigawatts (7,000MW) of power from the Minas Passage. (von Arx et al. 1974).

Ocean Current Hydro

Presently none of 100 patents in pilot project stage, because they are not cost effective: the average velocity is 1.5 to 2 m/s.

In a HUG, the final velocity is increased to 6 - 8 m/s or four times faster.

Previous studies indicate that a honeycomb of turbines producing 1,000 MW of continuous power from the Florida Current would extract about 4% of its total kinetic energy of 25 gigawatts (Karsten et al. 2008)

Power Density: 73.5 kW/m2

70% of the world's population lives within 320 kilometres (200 mi) of an ocean.

River Hydro

Presently no patents exist to capture energy from fast moving rivers

Power Density: 37 kW/m2

Power Output:123 kW/turbine Aboriginal communities are eligible for loan guarantees, a $250 million Targeted

Investment Program, which is aimed to strengthen economic native foundations: assistance of up to 100% of total eligible costs for non-commercial projects (the HUG pilot project).

HUG Siphon System

The water level behind the Otto Holden Hydro Dam on the Ottawa River can be maintained at 179.5 m above sea level, while the water level in Lake Huron is 176.5 m. This difference of 3 m is the basis of water transfer through a HUG Siphon System for 171 km.

The HUG Siphon system can be buried under any populated built up areas. HUG can also be raised to189.5 m above sea level.

It will be difficult to say NO to Water Export Revenue of $433 Million/year at the auction price of $0.13/ m3s for 135 m3

Each of the 150 million people whose needs could be served by the project would pay the reasonable rate of $50 per year. In this case, annual income from the exports would be $7.5 billion.

The total initial cost of this mega project is $347.5 + $232.25 = $580 million.

HUG has a potential of Hydro Revenue of $210 Million/yr (11 kW/m2)

HUG has a potential of Water Export Revenue of 56 m3s@auction price of $0.13/ m3s of $180 Million/yr / HUG System

Water Export Revenue of 2000 m3s = $6.4 Billion/yr for 35 HUG Siphon Systems

Return on Investment : $180 +$210 / $580 million = 67%/yr for 1 HUG System.

An alternative desalination plant (1.2 m3s) is twice the price, because it is energy intensive and it incurs high-pollution costs that could escalate as energy price increase.

Nine bodies of 265 m3s water share the same environment: only a distance of 1.5 m to 12 km apart, which can be diverted to Lake Superior.

Comparisons: Key Points of Difference

1. None of the Competitive Offerings are commercially viable. The closest is the $257 million Gorlov helical turbine system in Korea, which uses the same helical technology as HUG.

2. The Power Density of the Competition is very low: the reason is that the flow of a current treats all these turbines as obstacles to be avoided. In contrast, HUG creates a negative force, which attracts the flow, because the velocity in its Helical Turbine System is four time faster than the current.

3. The excessive weight causes installation problems: KORDI lost a whole year, because it's very large unit was swept away by the tide.

4. Although the declared water to wire efficiency is in excess of 35%, none of the Competitive Offerings can exceed this high efficiency held by HUG. See graphic.

5. The Power Density of 73.5 kW/m2 tells the whole story. The velocity of the current is the reason for the difference: the Power Density increases to the cube of the velocity and the HUG velocity is four times faster than the competition.

6. The most important consideration is cost: $885/kW is unusually low compared to most other hydro electric generation systems. In 2009, Hydro-Quebec cost for 4500 MW was $5,100/kW. See the comparison chart below

Net Benefit of Competitive Offering

Competitive Offering

Rotor swept area m2

Water-to-wire

efficiency

Total device weight tonnes

Power density kW/m2

Power output at 2.5 m/s

kW/turbine

Total Cost$Million

$Cost/kW

Verdant Power

(East River, NY)

20 - 60 20 - 35% 5 -7 (Unit only)

2.8 168 undisclosed undisclosed

OpenHydro (Bay of Fundy

NS)

78 20 - 33% 360 2.6 200 2.2 undisclosed

OCGen Turbine

58 (4

20 - 30% 60 6.9 400 undisclosed undisclosed

Generator rotors)SeaGen Current Turbine

402 50% 900 4 1600 undisclosed undisclosed

Tidal-current plant

(Hammerfest, Norway)

Not known

Not known

Not known

Not known

300 13.4 44,666(pilot)

KORDI(Uldolmok

Strait, Korea)

5 x 72 35% Not known

Not known

Not known 257 1,000

HUG 3.26 x 28units

35% < 5 73.5 260 .257/unit x 28 =7.2

885 (pilot)$0.15/kWh