2009 study of nanotechnology in the u.s. manufacturing
TRANSCRIPT
2009 Study of Nanotechnology in the U.S. Manufacturing Industry
NSERC Grantees Conference, December 7, 2010 Arlington, VA
Manish Mehta, Ph.D. National Center for Manufacturing Sciences (NCMS) 3025 Boardwalk Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USA Tel: (734) 995-4938; [email protected]; www.ncms.org
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 2
Acknowledgements
National Science Foundation - DMII Award # DMI-0802026
Dr. Mihail C. Roco, Senior Advisor, NNI
Dr. Chen Shao-chen, Program Director, Nanomanufacturing
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 3
Leads in Precompetitive r&D
Evaluates New Technologies
Accelerates Applications
Develops Cross-Sector Industry Collaborations
Enhances the Global Competitiveness of Our Members & Partners
What NCMS Does …
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 4
Study Objectives Snapshot of U.S. Nanotechnology Industry
Assess Key Trends, Strategies, Plans, Concerns
Report Aggregate Industry Statistics
Benchmark for Best Practices in Commercialization
Assess the Impact of Recession on Nanotech Industry
Metric of NNI, Other Public-Private Initiatives
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 5
Progressive NCMS Nano-Study Themes
2003 – Do U.S. manufacturers recognize the potential of nanotechnology? (80+ datasets)
2005 – Do surveyed organizations view nanotechnology differently from other advanced science and technology? (600+)
2009 – Are U.S. nanotechnology businesses viable, competitive and sustainable in current economically turbulent times? (270+)
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 6
1. Organization Role in Nano-Value Chain
2. Respondent’s Org Function 3. Nanotech Application Markets 4. Coping with Nano-Strategy 5. Corporate Priority 6. Overall Organization Capacity 7. Available Infrastructure 8. Level of Collaboration 9. Interactions with NNI Labs 10. Offshoring of Developments
11. Direct Staffing 12. Commercialization Timelines 13. Nano-Product Type(s) 14. Technology Readiness Level 15. Role of Government 16. Challenges & Barriers 17. US Leadership/Competitiveness 18. Impact of 2008-09 Recession 19. Short-term Business Outlook 20. Geographic Location
20 Strategic Issues Studied in 2009
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 7
NCMS Study Approach
1. Identification of Key Technical & Business Indicators
2. Develop 20-Screen Interactive Electronic Questionnaire
3. Target Manufacturing & Nanotechnology Industry - 10,000 Executives Solicited by PennWell/Small Times - Sampling Period: June – September 2009
4. Responses Analyzed, Report to NSF & Dissemination - October 2009 – March 2010
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 8
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 9
Disclaimer!
CAUTION While every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information
presented herein, neither NCMS nor the sponsor of this report can accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person or entity solely on
the contents of this report. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the author, and do not represent the views of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
“There are lies, damned lies, and statistics!” - Mark Twain
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 10
1. The U.S. Nanotech Value Chain Diverse value-chain players involved in commercialization ~66% respondents’ directly involved in nanomanufacturing activities More Academic organizations pursuing commercialization
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 11
2. Profile of Respondents ~50% hold C-Level Senior Positions; ~30% in Scientific/Technical/Engineering
<5% Identified as Academic/National Lab Entrepreneurs (vs ~ 19% in 2005 Study)
More universities and labs licensing nanotech IP to professionally managed firms
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 12
3. Dominant Application Markets Diverse applications of nanotechnology, addressing all major U.S. markets
More organizations are targeting near-term application opportunities
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 13
8. Collaborations in Nanotech Steady development of clusters and ecosystems ~11% share costs and intellectual property via co-created nanotech
(Markets - Semiconductors, Pharma/Medicine/Biotech, Chemicals, Automotive)
16% indicated purely internal development efforts (Markets - Semiconductors, Aerospace, Pharma/Medicine/Biotech)
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 14
9. Interactions with NNI Projects
143 respondents Breakdown of 127 respondents indicating the types of NNI project relationships
NOTE: 64 organizations indicated relationships with 2 or more NNI projects
11
36 27
57 63
127 (46%) Respondents indicated collaborations with NNI centers/projects 143 (54%) Respondents indicated no formal NNI project relationships exist
< 5% respondents indicated licensing IP from NNI centers/projects Opportunities abound for interactions between NNI centers and industry
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 15
9a. Target Market Sectors of NSF-NNIN/NSEC Collaborators
Alliances with NSF and academic centers are dominated by firms pursuing multiple nanotechnology applications
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 16
9b. Target Market Sectors of DOE Collaborators
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 17
9c. Nanotech Products of DOE Industry Collaborators
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 18
9d. Nanotech Products of NIH/NCI/NHLBI Collaborators
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 19
9e. Nanotechnology Products of NIST Collaborators
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 20
10. Offshoring Trends in Nanotechnology
~30% Respondent Organizations Involved in Offshore Developments E.g., Electronics/Semiconductor, Pharma/Medicine/Biotech, Energy
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 21
11. Direct Staffing Trends
2005 NCMS Study
50.00
19.26 19.56
8.15 7.04
2009 NCMS Study
2009 Data indicates consolidation is underway with smaller, IP-rich nanotech firms (<10 staff) being acquired by larger firms
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 22
12. Commercialization Timeline
Commercialized Product By 2009
Within 1 year
to Market
1 - 3 years
to Market
3 - 5 years
to Market
Over 5 years
to Market
Higher % respondents indicated commercial products (25% in 2009 vs 18% in 2005) 2008-09 Recession has slowed the U.S. nano-product commercialization pipeline Expect ~ 30% growth in new nano-enabled commercial products in 2010-12
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 23
13. Aggregate Nanotechnology Products A variety of products incorporating nanotechnology available or in development:
Functional Coatings, Energetics, Nanoparticulates & Displays, Protective Structures, Drug Delivery/Diagnostics, and Nanowires, Biomarker Products
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 24
14. Nanotechnology Readiness Levels NOTE: TRL = Technology Readiness Level (a risk assessment index used in the DoD)
TRL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Concept Level Implementation
Ready Product
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 25
14a.Market-Ready Products (High TRL=9)
1. Functional Coatings, Paints & Thin-films 2. Semiconductors, Lithography & Print Products 3. Nanoparticulates & Nanopowders 4. Energy Conversion & Storage Materials 5. Electronic Devices, Displays & Optoelectronics
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 26
16. Aggregate Barriers to Nanomanufacturing
List Largely Unchanged From 2005 NCMS Study Tier 1
Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 27
17. US Competitiveness in Nanotechnology 70% Respondents Felt the US Faces Competition
BREAKDOWN
AGGREGATE
RESPONSES BROKEN DOWN BY WORLD REGIONS
Japan, Taiwan,
Korea, HK, Singapore
China, India,
Malaysia, Thailand
UK, Germany, France,
Spain, etc
Russia, Poland, Ukraine, Hungary,
etc
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 28
18. Impact of 2008-09 Recession 3 of 4 Organizations indicated delayed product launches (> 1 year) due to:
Market uncertainty Lack of customer commitments to purchase products Lack of Capital to fund long-term product development
Sectors affected: Electronics/Semiconductor, Energy, Chemicals, Automotive
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 29
19. Near-Term Industry Outlook (~1 Year) Majority of respondents (57%) are cautiously optimistic about the economy Smaller nanotech suppliers have diminished capacity to ramp-up in recovery Sectors with IPO potential: Electronics/Semiconductor, Energy, Automotive
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 30
20. 2009 Distribution of 270 Responses
22.3% 6.4% 3.4% 18.7% 15.7% 8.5%
8.6% 2.3% 12.0%
2.3%
Distribution of Respondents is Shown by US Census Regions – It Mirrors the 2005 Study Dataset
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 31
Conclusions Nanotechnology is well past the ‘hype’ phase in nearly all sectors!
Greater complexity, uniformity, functionality due to nano-scale advances Commercialization focused on real needs - cost, scalability,
performance
Vertically integration up product value-chains, addressing greater functionality, sustainability, EHS issues
Organizations have scaled back lead-time plans, narrowed portfolios VCs shifted to multiple rounds and late-stage financing models
Non-dilutive capital is key for fast product launches and accelerating market-adoption of nano-enabled products Government investment needed to stimulate economic/job growth
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 32
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 33
Thank You! …
© National Center for Manufacturing Sciences 34
Dissemination Final report at NSF Nano.gov website
Hardcopy reports available at Registration Desk
Poster Display
Direct Your Questions Regarding Specific NCMS Nanotechnology Industry Study Findings To:
[email protected], (734) 995-4938