Clean Energy Patent Growth Index

CLEAN ENERGY PATENT GROWTH INDEX - Shine-On Solar Edition

In 2008, Clean Energy patents reached an all time annual high and the second quarter of 2009 was the biggest quarter so far for these patents according to the Clean Energy Patent Growth Index (CEPGI) as depicted quarterly in the first chart below.  The CEPGI provides an indication of the trend of innovative activity in the Clean Energy sector and is composed of several clean energy sectors including solar energy - which is the subject of this post. 

(Download Copy of This Post)

(click the image for a larger version)

As depicted below, solar technology patents have trended upwardly for the last four quarters and are beginning to regain ground lost since 2002, when tracking of the Clean Energy Patent Growth Index (CEPGI) began.

(click the image for a larger version)

Solar patents in the last quarter tracked approached the level of wind patents, which have been in second place to fuel cell patents in the CEPGI since 2006. Further, solar patents are poised to overtake wind patents in the coming year as per the trends in the quarterly components of the CEPGI below:

(click the image for a larger version)

The solar technology field includes a broad spectrum of technologies from small scale to utility scale and photovoltaic to solar thermal. A detailed analysis of the Solar technology portion of the CEPGI, and the technologies within it, provides a more precise depiction of solar patenting trends. The broadest categories in the solar energy field are photovoltaic technology and thermal solar technology. These categories may also be further divided into distinct subsets, which we have analyzed below.

SOLAR TECHNOLOGY

Solar “thermal energy” technology is defined exactly as one would expect, i.e., it is a way of harnessing the radiation received from the Sun to provide heat where it may be useful.  The Energy Information Administration (EIA), which produces official energy statistics for the U.S. government, classifies the collection of the sun’s radiation for thermal energy into three categories – low temperature (less than 110° F), medium temperature (less than 180° F), and high temperature (greater than 180° F).[1]  Typically low temperature collectors can be used for heating swimming pools or low-grade water and space heating, and medium temperature collectors can be used for domestic hot-water heating, solar cooling, or even solar cooking.  Both low and medium temperature collectors are typical examples of the “direct” use of the thermal energy to accomplish a desired task, and are often passive technologies – which involves little or no moving or active parts, and instead a thermal mass material is often utilized to store heat from the sun and release it as necessary.

High temperature collectors are more typically used to create electricity by operating generators (e.g., steam turned turbines). This is accomplished by concentrating solar radiation through the use of parabolic dishes and/or reflective mirrors to superheat water or often a type of molten salt. This is an “indirect” use of the sun’s radiation - as it first creates electricity, which then is used to perform a task.  Such use of solar radiation is defined herein as a type of “indirect” thermal technology, which refers to the conversion of thermal energy into mechanical energy (e.g., rotating a turbine), instead of the direct use of solar radiation as discussed above.  High temperature solar thermal is generally the solar technology used for large-scale electricity generation as it has much higher conversion efficiency than Photovoltaic technology (see below) (near 41%).[2] 

Thus, for the purpose of tracking technology trends, solar thermal technologies are divided into direct solar thermal and indirect solar thermal.

Photovoltaic (PV) systems use solar radiation to create electricity directly, and is performed through the use of semi-conductors.  They are often referred to as solar cells, and complete solar cell modules are described as solar panels.  PV systems are generally used on a smaller scale, such as rooftops of homes and businesses, and typically has an efficiency of between 5 and 15%.[3]  Concentrating PV systems are of course an exception to this generality.

PV technology can generally be classified into three generations.[4]  These generations are utilized to track the PV patents as further described below.  The first generation is based on crystalline semiconductors, largely silicon wafers.[5]  Improvements continue to be made in this area though the widespread adoption of this technology has been constrained until recently  by price and availability of raw silicon.[6]  The second generation consists of thin film technology.[7]  Thin film is usually processed from amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride, or copper indium gallium di-selenide (CIGS) and has gained popularity because it requires less semiconductor material than the first generation.[8]  Though more economical to provide, second generation PV (i.e., thin film) generally has a lower efficiency than that of the first generation.[9]  The third generation includes newer more experimental technologies that are further from the market[10] than the first and second generations.   Technologies such as dye-sensitized solar cells, quantum dots, nano-modified materials, and organic cells fall into this category.

In addition to the three generations of PV technology, a further Solar PV subcategory is defined as PV enhancement which spans the photovoltaic generations and is directed at the technological improvement of the efficiency of PV cells. Examples include technologies such as multi-junction cells (mjc), concentrated PV (cpv), and anti-reflective coatings.

Enabling technologies is defined as the innovations that must necessarily come with improved PV, but don’t directly impact the working of the PV cell. Such technologies include power conversion technologies, heat sinks, protective layering, roofing and panel connection components, bypass diodes, sun tracking devices, and other such technologies.

PV applications refer to the use of PV technology in an invention without actual innovation relative to PV. Common examples include technologies that use PV as a power supply for its operation – such as a solar car, an electrolysis process or a solar-pumped device.

Finally, solar hybrid systems may use both solar thermal and photovoltaic technologies, or one of these solar technologies combined with another type of generation process (wind, hydro, etc.).

Although rare, there are certain instances in the following analysis where a patent is classified and counted in more than one category. For example, sun concentrators are sometimes directed at both concentrated PV (under PV enhancement) and solar thermal energy generation (under indirect solar thermal). In addition, hybrid systems by their very definition involve technologies that can be put into one or more category. As such, the hybrid patents are simultaneously placed in the multiple categories. Because the hybrids are properly tracked in their corresponding categories, the hybrid systems category is not included as a subset of the larger photovoltaic or thermal group, but stands alone.

Thermal vs. Photovoltaic

As depicted below on an annual basis, granted patents in photovoltaic technology dropped sharply from 2002-2005 before flattening out and rising slightly, and jumping significantly in the most recent four quarters. The number of granted U.S. patents on the thermal technology side of solar energy increased slightly from 2002 to 2005 before slowly declining.

(click the image for a larger version)

As the graph by quarters show, however, thermal technology in general has been much less volatile than its photovoltaic counterpart and accounts for a much smaller percentage of solar technology innovation. In fact, the plot of the entire solar technology field appears to closely follow the photovoltaic trends without much pull from the thermal technology trends.

(click the image for a larger version)

The Thermal Technologies

As depicted below, quarterly indirect thermal patents outpaced direct thermal patents in all years tracked but one. Both the direct and the indirect thermal technologies have declined in the past four to five years. Generally speaking, indirect solar technology (e.g., the conversion of thermal energy into mechanical or electrical energy)  has consistently seen more patents and thus innovation than its direct counterpart.

(click the image for a larger version)

As depicted in the chart below, the top 10 patent owners in the Solar Thermal area since 2002 is dominated by Boeing (14), which has patents directed to indirect solar thermal technologies including  aspects of generating electricity via the heating of fluids and solar molten salt technologies. In second place Mario Rabinowitz ( a scientist and CEO of Armor Research) holds 8 patents with 7 directed to indirect technologies.  United Technologies comes in third with 6 patents in the indirect area relating to the heating of fluids via solar thermal to create electricity.  Of the 160 patents granted since 2002 in the solar thermal area, it is interesting that the top three solar thermal patent owners account for only 28 (or 17 percent) of the patents with the rest of solar thermal patent owners owning only 2 or less patents each.

(click the image for a larger version)

As will also be evident, the top holders of U.S. solar thermal patents are all U.S. entities except for Norio Akamatsu, the holder of 2 patents.

The Three Generations of Photovoltaic

As depicted below, the newer technologies did not lead the increases in PV technology. Instead, the first generation PV technology, after steep decline for four years running, began just as steep a rise in 2006. In fact, the first generation PV technology is the only technology whose most recent numbers exceed its 2002 starting point – meaning that innovation in this area is almost single handedly responsible for the leveling off of the solar energy patenting decline.  The first generation solar technology is widely considered to have the theoretical best efficiency.  Moreover, more innovators have entered the field, and the cost of silicon has decreased (with some dramatic price drops as of late).  See Ben Bahavar, Perspectives on Photovoltaics: As Technologies Develop, Costs Decrease While Efficiency Increases, June 2008; see also Rick Hodgin, Cost of Solar-grade Poly-silicon Ingots Decreasing Rapidly, Apr. 15, 2009.

(click the image for a larger version)

The second generation, or thin film technologies, on the other hand has shown a fairly consistent decline through almost the entire period of our tracking. However, the most recent quarters show that the decline may be leveling off.

(click the image for a larger version)

The third generation technology made substantial gains through most of the tracked period and matched the quarterly record total in the 3^rd quarter of 2009.  All in all, more patents have been granted on second generation technologies at 129 than the first (78) or third (86) during the tracking period.

(click the image for a larger version)

Additional PV Technology

As depicted below, PV Enhancement has maintained a steady reduction in innovation over the past seven years.  In contrast, both enabling PV technology and the use of PV in applications have been on the rise as of late.

(click the image for a larger version)

(click the image for a larger version)

(click the image for a larger version)

As shown in the chart below, Canon is far and away the leader in Solar PV patents with over 2.5 times the number of patents held by Sharp, its closest competitor.  Canon has patents in almost all PV categories, led by enabling (60), second generation (19), and first generation (9) technology patents.  Sharp spreads its patents out among various subcategories including enabling (15), first (4), second (8), third (5) and enhancement (5).   Kanegafuchi (13), Boeing (9), and Sanyo (10) also include large numbers of patents in enabling technologies.  Mario Rabinowitz has concentrated his efforts in solar enhancement technologies with 13 of such patents.   Sunpower has concentrated on first generation PV technologies with 10 patents in this area.  Emcore has 4 patents in PV enhancement and 5 in enabling technologies.  Konarka has all its patents in third generation technologies.  TDK has most of its patents in second generation and enabling technologies.  BP has a predominance of its patents in second generation technologies while GE has a majority in third generation PV patents.  Honda has several patents in first and second generation technologies.

(click the image for a larger version)

Of the top 15 PV patent holders, 7 are based in Japan while the rest are based in the U.S.  However, as is evident from the chart, Japanese patent holders dominate the top 15 in absolute numbers of patents.   In fact, the top three patent holders, all from Japan, hold over 17 percent of all PV patents.

Hybrid Systems

As depicted below, patents in hybrid technologies have hovered in very low numbers during the tracking period.

(click the image for a larger version)

Please contact us at info@cleanenergypatentgrowthindex.com if you have any questions or would like us to email you when we have updated this page or the CEPGI.

CLEAN ENERGY PATENT GROWTH INDEX.COM

Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C.

cleantechintellectualproperty.com

© 2009 Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C. 

---

[1] Energy Information Administration, Solar Thermal Manufacturing Activities, www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/solarreport/solar.html. 

[2] Charles W. Forsberg et al., High-Temperature Liquid-Fluoride-Salt Closed-Brayton-Cycle Solar Power Towers, 129 J. Solar Energy Engineering 141, 145 (2007). 

[3] The Renewable Energy Website, How Do PV Solar Panels Work, Jan. 10 2009 http://www.reuk.co.uk/print.php?article=How-Do-PV-Solar-Panels-Work.htm. 

[4] Nathan Furr & Travis Bradford, PV Innovation in North America, Greentech Media Inc. & the Prometheus Institute (Nov. 2008). 

[5] Id. at 13. 

[6] Id. 

[7] Id. at 14. 

[8] Id. 

[9] Id. 

[10] Id. 

USPTO Accelerates Greentech patent applications

The USPTO has announced a program to accelerate the examination of Cleantech or Greentech patent applications which is expected to shave 1 year off the pendency of such applications at the USPTO. Further details will be posted here when they are known. The PTO announcement is at the link below:

http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2009/09_33.jsp

 

Please contact us at info@cleanenergypatentgrowthindex.com if you have any questions or would like us to email you when we have updated this page or the CEPGI. 

CLEAN ENERGY PATENT GROWTH INDEX.COM

Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C.

cleantechintellectualproperty.com

© 2009 Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C.

 

 

The Greening of Patent Litigation

Issued patents are one indicator of innovation in clean energy technology, and recent litigation in this sector indicates the technology is becoming financially viable to justify patent enforcement.  Several cases filed in the federal courts reveals the increasing importance of clean energy patents.

A significant case involving one of the largest wind turbine manufacturers in the world, Enercon, emerged ten years ago.  In Enercon v. ITC, the ITC excluded Enercon’s variable speed wind turbines from entering the US after Kenetech Windpower filed a complaint alleging that Enercon’s wind turbines infringed its patents for controlling AC power output.  The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s decision, prohibiting Enercon from importing its wind turbines into the US until 2010.  In Southwest Windpower v. Aeromax, Southwest, a manufacturer of small wind turbines, claimed that Aeromax’s wind turbines infringed its patent.  An Arizona court issued an injunction prohibiting sales of Aeromax’s wind turbine.  In Gamesa Eolica, v. General Electric, Gamesa claimed that GE infringed its patent directed to a speed wind turbine that converts variable frequency AC to fixed frequency AC and maneuvers turbine speed to increase efficiency.  A Wisconsin court found no infringement in favor of GE.

In Paice v. Toyota, Paice claimed that Toyota’s hybrid vehicles included a drive train similar to one covered by its patents.  A Texas court held that Toyota infringed Paice’s patent, but denied an injunction and allowed Toyota to continue selling its hybrid cars for a royalty payment of $25 for each car sold during the life of the patent.  The case was affirmed on appeal.  In Ovonic v. Matsushita, in Michigan, Ovonic claimed Matsushita’s hybrid electric vehicles infringed its patents covering nickel metal hydride batteries.  The parties ultimately entered into a settlement agreement that included a cross-license and a combined license fee of $30 million.  In Maxwell Technologies v. NessCap, a California case, Maxwell, a manufacturer of ultracapacitors for hybrid cars and renewable energy sources, filed a complaint against Nesscap, a Korean competitor, to enforce its patents related to electric double layer capacitors.  The court entered a preliminary injunction enjoining NessCap from selling its prismatic ultracapacitor products.  Then, in January 2007, Nesscap filed its own suit against Maxwell, alleging that Maxwell’s ultracapacitors infringe a NessCap patent.  Both cases remain pending.

Other pending cases include, ReliOn, Inc. v. Hydra Fuel Cell, in which ReliOn claims Hydra infringed its patent directed to fuel cell power systems, and Quantum Catalytics v. Ze-gen, in which Quantum alleges its waste service competitors infringe numerous patents directed to gasification methods for creating compounds from waste, such as hydrogen and carbon monoxide, that can be used to generate electricity.

The existence of clean energy patent cases throughout the country is evidence of the substantial value of these patents and, if the market for clean energy continues to grow, the number of patent cases is likely to increase as more patents are granted.

CLEAN ENERGY PATENT GROWTH INDEX.COM

Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C.

cleantechintellectualproperty.com

© 2008 Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C.

The Growth of “Green” Trademarks

The term GREEN suddenly seems to be everywhere, and yet a precise definition of what constitutes a GREEN product or service is not easily found.  In the 1970s, political groups used GREEN primarily as a symbol of environmental protection and social justice, i.e. the “Green Movement.”  Today, the meaning of GREEN is expanding and used in connection with a variety of products and services in the marketplace.

The Clean Energy Patent Growth Index (CEPGI) of Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C. tracks the granting of patents by the United States Patent and Trademark (USPTO) in the clean energy sector.  As of the third quarter of 2007, the CEPGI indicated a generally upward trend in clean technology patents over the last five years.  In another area of intellectual property, the growth of GREEN trademarks can provide us with further insight into the cleantech marketplace.

“Green Energy” is considered energy that is renewable, more efficient or environmentally friendly.  “Green Power” is electricity supplied in whole or in part from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, geothermal, hydropower, and various forms of biomass.  In the U.S., however, there currently are no agreed-upon industry standards or restrictions regarding what GREEN actually means in connection with energy and energy technologies.  Unlike the word ORGANIC, which has been regulated by the National Organic Standards Board since 2002, there are no guidelines regarding who can claim to be GREEN.

However, there is a general idea in the marketplace regarding what GREEN should mean, and its use is surely indicative of current trends in the economy.   A trademark search on the USPTO website for trademark applications filed, by year, that incorporate GREEN in connection with energy related goods/services is telling.  These filings were compared with a search for CLEAN and RENEWABLE in connection with similar goods/services. 

As seen below, while trademark applications for CLEAN and RENEWABLE slightly increased over the past five years, a distinct spike was seen in applications incorporating GREEN.  Specifically, GREEN applications were 3.5 times greater in 2007 than in 2006, and increased ten fold since 2004.  The total number of applications since 1990 incorporating GREEN in connection with energy related goods/services exceeds the combined filings for CLEAN and RENEWABLE. 

 

Whether the substantial spike in the occurrence of GREEN as a trademark can manage to sustain itself in the marketplace remains to be seen.  However, if it is any indication, USPTO trademark filings that include ORGANIC have yet to slow down despite the newly imposed standards.

Although not as sophisticated as the CEPGI, the above analysis furthers the conclusion that, in the face of an increasing concern over energy costs, resource shortages, and global environmental concerns, not only are technological innovations occurring in the clean technology sector, but financial investments, business ventures, and marketing efforts are being made as well. 

cleantechintellectualproperty.com