Abstract
Introduction
The economic situation and, in particular, the upward trend in the price of
fossil energies and political pressure on the markets induced in part by
public opinion and in part by geopolitical aims to loosen the ties of energy
dependence has meant that considerable budgets have been allocated over many
years to alternative energy sources. The production of photovoltaic
electricity is one promising avenue among these various types of "clean
energies".
Three main technological avenues exist for the photovoltaic energy production
market: crystalline silicon cells (which, in patent terms, represent around
3300 families since 1985), thin film cells (4300 families) and organic and
hybrid cells (a little less than 1900 families). This study, which focuses on
"organic and hybrid" technology, represents the third part of a three-part
analysis of the patent environment in the photovoltaics field.
Organic and hybrid cells are photovoltaic cells in which at least the active
layer is constituted of organic molecules. There are three main types of
organic and hybrid cells: exclusively organic photovoltaic cells (polymer or
molecular), dye sensitized solar cells (DSSCs), which are constituted of an
active layer made of inorganic material (often titanium oxide) in which is
incorporated a photosensitive pigment, and finally other hybrid cells in which
there is a polymer/metal oxide mixture.
These types of technologies enable not just the mass production of
photovoltaic cells but also use very little material, meaning flexible and
inexpensive supports can be used, such as thin plastic films for example.
These advantages augur well for the success of this type of technology.
However, organic and hybrid solar cells, mainly due to their still too low
efficiency, are not yet able to compete with silicon cells or Cd-Te type thin
films for the mass production of electricity, despite the fact that both of
the latter are more expensive to produce on account of the cost of raw
materials.
Although organic and hybrid technology is still in the maturation stage in
both public and private research centres, industry is already coming up with
an incalculable number of applications. For example, the German firm BASF and
the Japanese firm TOYOTA are already developing windows coated with organic
solar cells to produce electricity. KONARKA, for its part, is developing
applications in everyday objects (handbags, tents, rucksacks, battery
chargers, telephones and laptop computers) or urban equipment (traffic lights,
street lights, roofs, lighted signs, etc.), which would thus be selfcharging.
NEDO (New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization, Japan),
which has drawn up a road map for organic cell technology efficiency,
estimates that 15% laboratory efficiency could be attained in 2020 and 18% by
2030. This technology could therefore reach maturity within ten or so years.
Several industrial concerns have therefore launched themselves into an assault
of this very high-potential market by building up robust patent portfolios.
Today, there are as many patent applications filed on organic and hybrid
technologies as on thin film technology, even though the latter is
considerably more mature.
This IP Overview study aims to establish a global panorama of the intellectual
property of the photovoltaic organic and hybrid cells sector. Its main
objectives are in particular to determine those responsible for initiating
innovations as well as new players and emerging inventors, to determine the
most active research centres as well as potential partnerships, to position
the different players in terms of technological and political choices of
filing patents and to provide a complementary outlook to market studies. After
an overall analysis of the photovoltaics field, aimed at evaluating the
technological weighting of each of the technologies involved (crystalline
silicon, thin films and organic and hybrid), we have focused herein more in
detail on patents and patent applications, filed between 1985 and mid 2007,
that can be associated with "organic and hybrid" technology in an overall
manner and according to the segmentation evoked previously (exclusively
organic, DSSC and other hybrids). We then provide geographic zooms on
Japanese, Asian (with the exception of Japan), American and finally European
priority patents.
Table of Contents
METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
1. BRIEF OUTLINE OF THE PHOTOVOLTAICS MARKET
2. GLOBAL OVERVIEW OF PHOTOVOLTAIC PATENTS
- 2.1. Technological segmentation
- 2.2. Segmentation by application
- 2.3. Zoom on companies involved in the market
- 2.4. Zoom on CANON
- 2.4.1. History of patent application filings and ambitions?
- 2.4.2. Segmentation of the patent portfolio
- 2.4.3. Filing policy
- 2.4.4. Analysis of the patent portfolio
3. ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELL PATENTS - WORLD ANALYSIS
- 3.1. Protection strategies
- 3.1.1. Evolution of patent filings
- 3.1.2. Priority filings
- 3.2. Technological maturity factors
- 3.2.1. Topology of the size of portfolios
- 3.2.2. Analysis of the granting of patents
- 3.2.3. Evolution in the number of applicants
- 3.3. Applicants
- 3.3.1. Major applicants
- 3.3.2. Major collaborations
- 3.4. Topology of patents in the sector
- 3.4.1. Segmentation of patents by technology
- 3.4.2. Type of cells protected by the main players
- 3.4.3. Segmentation of patents by IPC code
4. ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELL PATENTS - JAPAN FOCUS
- 4.1. Overall data
- 4.2. Applicants
- 4.3. Inventors
5. ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELL PATENTS - REST OF ASIA FOCUS
- 5.1. Overall data
- 5.2. Applicants
- 5.3. Inventors
6. ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELL PATENTS - UNITED STATES FOCUS
- 6.1. Overall data
- 6.2. Applicants
- 6.3. Inventors
7. ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELL PATENTS - EUROPEAN FOCUS
- 7.1. Overall data
- 7.2. Applicants
- 7.3. Inventors
CONCLUSIONS
- APPENDIX 1: LIST OF 124 COMPANIES PRESENT IN THE PHOTOVOLTAICS MARKET AND
THEIR ASSOCIATED PATENT PORTFOLIOS
- APPENDIX 2: EVOLUTION OVER TIME OF THE FILINGS OF THE 124 COMPANIES
PRESENT IN THE PHOTOVOLTAICS MARKET
- APPENDIX 3: POTENTIAL INVENTOR MOVEMENTS
- APPENDIX 4: TCO TYPE PROTECTED BY THE MAJOR PLAYERS
- APPENDIX 5: 3D MATRIX TYPE PROTECTED BY THE MAJOR PLAYERS
- APPENDIX 6: DYE TYPE PROTECTED BY THE MAJOR PLAYERS
- APPENDIX 7: IPC APPEARANCE
List of Figures
- FIGURE 1 - PHOTOVOLTAIC CELL PRODUCTION (MW), ANNUAL PHOTOVOLTAIC
PRODUCTION BY COUNTRY, 1995-2007
- FIGURE 2 - WORLD PHOTOVOLTAICS MARKET (CUMULATIVE INSTALLATIONS)
- FIGURE 3 - MARKET SEGMENTATION BY TECHNOLOGY (PHOTON INTERNATIONAL, MARCH
2006)
- FIGURE 4 - TOP CELL MANUFACTURERS (PRODUCTION MW, PHOTON INTERNATIONAL,
2007)
- FIGURE 5 - EVOLUTION IN GLOBAL PATENT FILINGS
- FIGURE 6 - TECHNOLOGICAL SEGMENTATION
- FIGURE 7 - NICHE MARKET BY APPLICANT - 1/2
- FIGURE 8 - NICHE MARKET BY APPLICANT - 2/2
- FIGURE 9 - TOPOLOGY OF THE PATENT PORTFOLIOS OF THE IDENTIFIED COMPANIES
- FIGURE 10 - EVOLUTION IN CANON' S PATENT FILINGS
- FIGURE 11 - CANON' S PORTFOLIO SEGMENTATION
- FIGURE 12 - CANON' S PATENT EXTENSIONS MAP
- FIGURE 13 - EVOLUTION IN CANON' S EXTENSIONS
- FIGURE 14 - CANON' S EXTENSION MODE OVER TIME
- FIGURE 15 - OVERVIEW OF CANON' S GRANTED PATENTS
- FIGURE 16 - CANON' S MAJOR TEAMS
- FIGURE 17 - FORECAST OF THE NUMBER OF FILINGS
- FIGURE 18 - MAP OF PRIORITY FILINGS CONCERNING ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELLS
- FIGURE 19 - EVOLUTION OF PRIORITY FILINGS CONCERNING ORGANIC AND HYBRID
CELLS
- FIGURE 20 - PORTFOLIO SIZE VS. NUMBER OF PLAYERS
- FIGURE 21 - OVERVIEW OF "ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELLS" GRANTED PATENTS
- FIGURE 22 - ANALYSIS OF JAPANESE, US AND EUROPEAN GRANT RATES OVER TIME
- FIGURE 23 - EVOLUTION OF THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS
- FIGURE 24 - MAJOR APPLICANTS IN THE FIELD
- FIGURE 25 - GLOBAL COLLABORATIONS MAP CONCERNING ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELLS
- FIGURE 26 - SEGMENTATION OF PHOTOVOLTAIC ORGANIC AND HYBRID CELL PATENT
PORTFOLIOS
- FIGURE 27 - EVOLUTION IN FILINGS BY TECHNOLOGY
- FIGURE 28 - TYPES OF CELLS OF THE MAJOR PLAYERS
- FIGURE 29 - TOPICS OF THE MAJOR PLAYERS
- FIGURE 30 - BREAKDOWN OF THE MAIN IPC CODES APPEARING IN PATENT
APPLICATIONS
- FIGURE 31 - EVOLUTION IN THE NUMBER OF JAPANESE PRIORITY FILINGS
- FIGURE 32 - EVOLUTION IN JAPANESE FILINGS AND BREAKDOWN OF INDUSTRIAL
PATENTS
- FIGURE 33 - MAP OF EXTENSIONS (JAPANESE PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 34 - EVOLUTION IN EXTENSIONS (JAPANESE PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 35 - MAJOR APPLICANTS IN THE FIELD (JAPANESE PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 36 - BREAKDOWN OF PATENT PORTFOLIOS BY APPLICANT (JAPANESE PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 37 - TOPICS OF THE MAJOR JAPANESE INVENTORS
- FIGURE 38 - MAJOR INVENTOR TEAMS (JAPANESE PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 39 - EVOLUTION IN THE NUMBER OF FILINGS (KR, CN OR TW PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 40 - EVOLUTION IN KR, CN AND TW FILINGS AND BREAKDOWN OF INDUSTRIAL
PATENTS
- FIGURE 41 - MAP OF PRIORITY FILINGS / ZOOM ON REST OF ASIA
- FIGURE 42 - PATENT EXTENSIONS MAP (KR PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 43 - PATENT EXTENSIONS MAP (TW PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 44 - MAJOR APPLICANTS IN THE FIELD (KR, CN OR TW PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 45 - BREAKDOWN OF PATENT PORTFOLIOS BY APPLICANT (KR, CN OR TW
PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 46 - TOPICS OF THE MAJOR KR, CN OR TW INVENTORS
- FIGURE 47 - MAJOR INVENTOR TEAMS (KR, CN OR TW PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 48 - EVOLUTION IN THE NUMBER OF FILINGS (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 49 - EVOLUTION IN US FILINGS AND BREAKDOWN OF INDUSTRIAL PATENTS
- FIGURE 50 - PATENT EXTENSIONS MAP (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 51 - EVOLUTION IN EXTENSIONS (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 52 - MAJOR APPLICANTS IN THE FIELD (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 53 - BREAKDOWN OF PATENT PORTFOLIOS BY APPLICANT (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 54 - TOPICS OF THE MAJOR INVENTORS (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 55 - MAJOR INVENTOR TEAMS (US PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 56 - EVOLUTION IN THE NUMBER OF FILINGS (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 57 - EVOLUTION IN EUROPEAN FILINGS AND BREAKDOWN OF INDUSTRIAL
PATENTS
- FIGURE 58 - MAP OF PRIORITY FILINGS (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 59 - EVOLUTION IN FILING BY COUNTRY (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 60 - PATENT EXTENSIONS MAP (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 61 - EVOLUTION IN EXTENSIONS (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 62 - MAJOR APPLICANTS IN THE FIELD (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 63 - BREAKDOWN OF PATENT PORTFOLIOS BY APPLICANT (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 64 - TOPICS OF THE MAJOR INVENTORS (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- FIGURE 65 - MAJOR INVENTOR TEAMS (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
List of Tables
- TABLE 1 - EVOLUTION IN THE PATENT FILINGS OF MAJOR PLAYERS (JAPANESE
PRIORITY)
- TABLE 2 - EMERGING APPLICANTS (JAPANESE PRIORITY)
- TABLE 3 - EVOLUTION IN PATENT APPLICATION FILINGS BY INVENTOR (JAPANESE
PRIORITY)
- TABLE 4 - EVOLUTION IN THE PATENT FILINGS OF MAJOR PLAYERS (KR, CN OR TW
PRIORITY)
- TABLE 5 - EVOLUTION IN PATENT APPLICATION FILINGS BY INVENTOR (KR, CN OR
TW PRIORITY)
- TABLE 6 - EVOLUTION IN THE PATENT FILINGS OF MAJOR PLAYERS (US PRIORITY)
- TABLE 7 - EMERGING APPLICANTS (US PRIORITY)
- TABLE 8 - EVOLUTION IN PATENT APPLICATION FILINGS BY INVENTOR (US PRIORITY)
- TABLE 9 - EVOLUTION IN THE PATENT FILINGS OF MAJOR PLAYERS (EUROPEAN
PRIORITY)
- TABLE 10 - EMERGING APPLICANTS (EUROPEAN PRIORITY)
- TABLE 11 - EVOLUTION IN PATENT APPLICATION FILINGS BY INVENTOR (EUROPEAN
PRIORITY)
