1. Berkeley Lab Innovation Grants September 2013

2. 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

3. Why is there a need ? Great Idea! MARKETABLE PRODUCTS Valley of Death

4. How the Companies See It

5. 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 ?”

6. 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

7. Leverage investment in R & D Level of technology development Low High Likelihood of getting licensed LowHigh Operating data Prototype Integration with other components Some scale up

8. Govt. FundingCorp. & Private Investment Pursuit of Profit Scientific Investigation Published Disclosures Proof of Concept Demo or Prototype Feasibility Stage ? Lack of Basic Economic and Business Metrics Pursuit of Scientific Knowledge Science Stage Stakeholder Incentives Inadequate to Bridge the “Valley of Death”

9. Sales & Profit Discovery Scientific Knowledge Proof of Concept Characterization Demonstration Prototype Product Development Translating Invention into Commercial Products Step & Loop Progression Field Test Social Impact Pile of good, but not good enough Marketing

10. 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

11. 2012 and 2013 Awardees Spectrally Selective Dynamic Window Coatings Based on Nanocrystals - Delia Milliron Parallel Software Framework for TOUGH Suite of Codes - George Pau, Stefan Finsterle, Eric Sonnenthal Integrated Geophysical Electromagnetic Seismic Subsurface Imaging - Michael Commer, Greg, Newman, Petr Petrov iMEA 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 Logging Alex Pines, Vik Bajaj, Dmitry Budker 2012 2013

12. 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