Natural Gas and Power Generation

The GHG Solution Is At Hand

Jack FuscoPresident &

Chief Executive Officer Calpine Corporation

November 15, 2010

22

Safe Harbor Statement

Forward-Looking StatementsThe information contained in this presentation includes certain estimates, projections and other forward-looking information that reflect Calpine’s current views with respect to future events and financial performance. These estimates, projections and other forward-looking information are based on assumptions that Calpine believes, as of the date hereof, are reasonable. Inevitably, there will be differences between such estimates and actual results, and those differences may be material.

There can be no assurance that any estimates, projections or forward-looking information will be realized.

All such estimates, projections and forward-looking information speak only as of the date hereof. Calpine undertakes no duty to update or revise the information contained herein.

You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the estimates, projections and other forward-looking information in this presentation as they are based on current expectations and general assumptions and are subject to various risks, uncertainties and other factors, including those set forth in Calpine’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, and in other documents that Calpine files with the SEC. Many of these risks, uncertainties and other factors are beyond Calpine’s control and may cause actual results to differ materially from the views, beliefs and estimates expressed herein. Calpine’s reports and other information filed with the SEC, including the risk factors identified in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, and Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, can be found on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and on Calpine’s website at www.calpine.com.

Reconciliation to GAAP Financial InformationThe following presentation includes certain “non-GAAP financial measures” as defined in Regulation G under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Schedules are included herein that reconcile the non-GAAP financial measures included in the following presentation to the most directly comparable financial measures calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP.

33

National Portfolio of nearly 29,000 MW

Geographic Diversity

Dispatch Flexibility1

Note: Projects Under Advanced Development include Russell City Energy Center and upgrade at existing Los Esteros Critical Energy Facility.1 Based on estimated generation for 2009.

Baseload

3,801 MW

13%

Peaking

6,852 MW

24%

Intermediate

18,016 MW

63%

Southeast6,083 MW

21%

North7,336 MW

26%

West7,817 MW

27%

Texas7,433 MW

26%

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

CPN NRG RRI DYN MIR

Ge

ne

rati

ng

Ca

pa

cit

y (

MW

)

Steam Gas and Oil

Gas Combustion TurbinesModern Gas Combined Cycles

CoalNuclear

GeothermalWind

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

CPN DYN RRI NRG MIR

Hea

t Ra

te (

btu/

KWh)

-

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

CPN NRG DYN RRI MIR

2009

Ge

nera

tion

(MW

h)

4

-

10

20

30

40

50

CPN DYN NRG RRI MIR

Age

(Ye

ars)

Source: SNL Financial.

Modern

Efficient

Scale

Calpine’s focus on clean technologies makes it a unique independent power producer

Calpine is the nation’s largest baseload renewable, natural gasand cogeneration power provider

Calpine is the nation’s largest baseload renewable, natural gasand cogeneration power provider

Introduction to Calpine

Source: Energy Velocity (2008, adjusted for asset purchases/divestitures).

IPP PEERSIPP PEERS

IPP PEERS IPP PEERS

Exclusively Gas and Geothermal

Source: 2009 SEC filings.

200

9 G

enera

tion

(M

Wh

)

Source: Energy Velocity (2009). Not adjusted for steam, and excluding non-fossil fuel generation.

Our steam-adjusted heat

rate is 7,263

Heat

Rate

(btu

/KW

h)

5

-

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

CPN Industry Avg

Mer

cury

lbs

/ GW

h

-

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

CPN Industry Avg DYN NRG RRI MIR

SO

2 lb

s / M

Wh

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

CPN Industry Avg DYN NRG RRI MIR

CO

2 lb

s / M

Wh

Increased use of natural gas generation could catapult the US to a cleaner future starting today

Environmental Advantages of Gas

Generation

Virtually Zero SO2CO2: Less than Half our Peers’ Emissions per MWh

NOx: A Fraction of our Peers Virtually Zero Mercury Emissions

Calpine’s emissions statistics illustrate the potential for natural gas generation to lower the power sector’s environmental footprint.

Calpine’s emissions statistics illustrate the potential for natural gas generation to lower the power sector’s environmental footprint.

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

CPN Industry Avg DYN NRG MIR RRI

NO

x lb

s / M

Wh

IPP PEERS PEERS

PEERS

Sources: Peer data based on Energy Velocity CEMS (2008, adjusted for divestitures). Industry averages based on EIA Electric Power Annual 2007, released January 21, 2009 and EIA Annual Energy Outlook, April 2009.

6

Increased utilization of existing gas-fired capacity could single-handedly reduce power sector CO2 emissions by 20%

• Since gas combined cycles emit less than half the CO2 of coal plants per MWh, switching to gas could significantly reduce power sector emissions, even without incremental capital investment.

Environmental Advantages of Gas

Generation

Reflects EIA estimates of gas combined cycle capacity (~190GW), average utilization (<40%), and power sector emissions (EIA Annual Energy Outlook, April 2009). The estimate of potential CO2 reduction reflects the impact of increasing the utilization of existing gas plants (to 85%, displacing higher emitting generation).

Potential CO2 Emissions Reduction Through Increased Utilization of Existing Gas-Fired Generation

1,899

-482

2,381

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Projected Power SectorCO2 Emissions in 2012

Potential Reduction fromIncreased Gas Generation

Potential Power Sector CO2Emissions in 2012

CO

2 E

mis

sio

ns

(Mill

ion

s o

f M

etri

c T

on

nes

)

Gas-Fired Generation: A Solution for Tomorrow, Today

Otay Mesa Energy Center

Nuclear Plant Wind Farm

Cost ($/KW) ~$950 $3,000 - $4,500 $1,900 - $2,200 $4,500 - $6,000

Construction Period1

29 mos. 60 – 84 mos. 12 – 18 mos. 12 – 24 mos.

Land Usage 1/20th acre / MW Up to 2 acres / MW Up to 83 acres / MW Up to 10 acres / MW

Water usage2

~15 gal/ MWh Up to 750 gal / MWh Negligible Up to 800 gal / MWh

Subsidies Required3

None Largest Large Larger

In a world of scarce natural and financial resources, gas-fired generation offers a path to a cleaner footprint with lower capital

requirements

In a world of scarce natural and financial resources, gas-fired generation offers a path to a cleaner footprint with lower capital

requirements

7

Sources: EIA, E3, AWEA, DOE, CEC, Calpine, Public data.1 Does not include permitting period.2 Otay Mesa features air cooled system. Nuclear usage assumes recirculating cooling system.3 Assuming natural gas price of $6 - $8/mmbtu.

Solar Field (CSP)

8

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Nov

-01

May

-02

Nov

-02

Apr

-03

Oct

-03

Apr

-04

Oct

-04

Mar

-05

Sep-

05

Mar

-06

Sep-

06

Feb-

07

Aug-

07

Feb-

08

Jul-08

Jan-0

9

Jul-09

Dec

-09

Jun-1

0

$/M

Wh

PJ M East ERCOT Houston Northern California (NP15) Avg US Residential Rate

Wholesale power prices have returned toward 10-year lows, due in large part to abundant shale gas supplies

Wholesale On Peak Electricity Prices and Residential Rates

Source: Calpine, Platts, and EIA data. Prices reflect wholesale rolling 12-month forward average on peak prices for PJM-East, Texas (ERCOT-Houston), and California (NP-15). Residential rates reflect annual average retail price of electricity to end-users.

High prices from 2005 to mid-2008 reflected lower expectations of domestic

natural gas supplies.

The proliferation of advanced shale drilling techniques increased

domestic gas supplies, leading to a sharp drop in spot and forward

natural gas prices.

Upcoming residential rate

decline?