Berkeley Lab Innovation Grants

September 2013

Program Details

Up to $100,000 for: Technology development to specified milestones Prototype Improve efficiency, durability, other Integration of components

Funds from licensing royalties No G & A burden

Why is there a need ?

GreatIdea!

marketABLE PRODUCTS

Valley of Death

How the Companies See It

What do companies say?

“While this is interesting, it is at too early a stage for us to pursue discussions at this time.”

“Is there a prototype for us to evaluate ?”

“Please provide data relevant to operating conditions.”

“Has the technology been integrated with other system components ?”

“Can the system be used in a continuous flow mode ?”

“What is the efficiency ?”

Goal of Innovation Grants

Mature the technology sufficiently to get it licensed once Innovation Grant milestones have been achieved

Ideal if milestones are informed by industry feedback

Leverage investment in R & D

Level of technology development

Low

High

Likelihood of getting licensed

Low High

Operating data

PrototypeIntegration with other components

Some scale up

Govt. Funding Corp. & Private Investment

Pursuit of Profit

Scie

ntific

Inve

stiga

tion

Publ

ishe

d D

iscl

osur

es

Proo

f of C

once

ptD

emo

or P

roto

type

FeasibilityStage

?Lack of Basic Economic and

Business Metrics

Pursuit of Scientific Knowledge

ScienceStage

Stakeholder Incentives Inadequate to Bridge the “Valley of Death”

Sales &Profit

DiscoveryScientific

Knowledge

Proof of ConceptCharacterization 　

　　

DemonstrationPrototype

Product Development

Translating Invention into Commercial ProductsStep & Loop Progression

Field Test

Social Impact

Pile of good, but not good enough 　　　

Marketing

1) Is there sufficient market size to attract entrepreneurial or industry investment?

2) Does the technology offer significant benefits over competitive alternatives?

3) Is the technology perceived by industry as too risky without further evidence?

4) Will achieving the proposed development milestones give the technology a good chance of being licensed?

Criteria for Proposal selection

There must be an ROI or software disclosure on which the proposed works builds

2012 and 2013 AwardeesSpectrally Selective Dynamic Window Coatings Based on Nanocrystals

- Delia MillironParallel Software Framework for TOUGH Suite of Codes

- George Pau, Stefan Finsterle, Eric SonnenthalIntegrated Geophysical Electromagnetic Seismic Subsurface Imaging

- Michael Commer, Greg, Newman, Petr PetroviMEA Chip Prototyping and Optimization

- Daojing Wang, Rafael Gomez-Sjoberg

Neutron Generator to Replace Radioactive Sources - Qing Ji, Thomas Schenkel

Endothelial Function in Blood Pressure Cuff - Jonathan Maltz, Thomas Budinger

Improved Carbon Black Additive for High Energy Li-ion Batteries - Robert Kostecki, Vincent Battaglia, Simon Lux

Graphene-based Optical Modulator for Data Communication - Xiang Zhang

Radiation Sensitivity Assessment - Sylvain Cotes, Jian-Hua Mao, Steven Yannone

Bifunctional Chelators for Use in Radiopharmaceuticals - Kenneth Raymond

Rapid MRI Well LoggingAlex Pines, Vik Bajaj, Dmitry Budker

2012

2013

The Process

1) Questions ? – call x 6467 and ask for Bill or Pam

2) October 15 – Proposals due

1) Tech Transfer will meet with each applicant

2) External review panel - December

3) Awards announced -- December 2013

1) Work can begin as early as January 2014

1) Tech Transfer will work with each awardee to develop a commercialization plan