Skip to main content
×
Home

Applying insights from the pharma innovation model to battery commercialization—pros, cons, and pitfalls

  • Eve D. Hanson (a1), Samir Mayekar (a2) and Vinayak P. Dravid (a3)
Abstract
ABSTRACT

Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry’s commercialization successes can be identified and applied to the U.S. battery industry to potentially improve its discouragingly low startup success rates.

A carbon-neutral and sustainable society of the future necessitates the widespread use of battery technologies that are efficient, effective, and economical. Lower-cost and more energy-dense battery technology can help solve many of our energy challenges, such as balancing the intermittency problems of renewables and making possible electric transportation fleets. New advanced materials are crucial to such battery advances. However, bringing advanced energy materials to market in the United States remains a formidable challenge. Hurdles include high upfront capital requirements, long timelines to success, and few opportunities for technology risk-reduction. Such challenges impede startups from developing financially viable technologies. Consequently, recent advances in battery performance have come from incremental changes implemented by large companies. By contrast, the pharmaceutical industry has many similar technical challenges, yet has an established pipeline of U.S. startup successes. We review and compare the current market structures of battery and pharma innovation. We propose an updated model of U.S. battery commercialization, informed by the pharma model’s successes. The new approach’s benefits and potential pitfalls are discussed. We provide recommendations for entrepreneurs, investors, manufacturers, and policy makers to improve the battery innovation ecosystem. We hope that these ideas spur the battery community to more successfully commercialize and deploy transformative technologies.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Applying insights from the pharma innovation model to battery commercialization—pros, cons, and pitfalls
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Applying insights from the pharma innovation model to battery commercialization—pros, cons, and pitfalls
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Applying insights from the pharma innovation model to battery commercialization—pros, cons, and pitfalls
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
a) Address all correspondence to Vinayak P. Dravid at v-dravid@northwestern.edu
References
Hide All
1. EV Everywhere Grand Challenge Blueprint, Vol. 31 (Department of Energy, 2013). Available at: https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/02/f8/eveverywhere_blueprint.pdf (accessed August 18, 2017).
2. Gaines L. and Cuenca R.M.: Costs of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Vehicles (Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL USA, 2000).
3. Inventory of US greenhouse gas emissions and sinks, 1990–2014. EPA, Ed. EPA 430-R-16-002, 2016.
4. Elliott D.: A balancing act for renewables. Nat. Energy 1, 15003 (2016).
5. van Schalkwijk W. and Scrosati B.: Advances in Lithium-Ion Batteries (Springer Science & Business Media, New York, NY, 2007).
6. Voelcker J.: Electric-car battery costs: Tesla $190 per kwh for pack, GM $145 for cell (2016). Available at: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1103667_electric-car-battery-costs-tesla-190-per-kwh-for-pack-gm-145-for-cells (accessed March 10, 2017).
7. Pillot C.: The Worldwide Rechargeable Battery Market 2012–2025 (Avicenne Energy, Nice, France, 2013); p. 67.
8. Mayekar S.: Bringing New Battery Technology to Market: Crossing the Chasm (Sinode Systems, Lemont, IL, 2015).
9. Crabtree G., Kócs E., and Trahey L.: The energy-storage Frontier: Lithium-ion batteries and beyond. MRS Bull. 40, 10671078 (2015).
10. Arora A., Buckland R., Buiter W., D’Antonio P., Ding S., Edwards R., Elliot R., Fordham T., Goldin I., Hale J., Horowitz K., Iizuka N., Lee E., Lee W., Levkovich T., Lorenzen H., Lubin D., Menuet G., Morse E., Morse R., Murashima K., Peterson D., Pitt A., Rahbari E., Sasaki T., Saunders M., Savvantidou S., Schofield M., Shen M., Shoup J., Spittle M., and Yuen A.: Investment Themes in 2015: Dealing with Divergence (Citi GPS, 2015); p. 54.
11. Pillot C.: The Rechargeable Battery Market and Main Trends 2015–2025, Lithium Battery International Summit, Shenzhen, China (Avicenne Energy, Shenzhen, China, 2016).
12. Nykvist B. and Nilsson M.: Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 329332 (2015).
13. Franco G.G.: Advanced and post lithium-ion batteries 2016–2026: Technologies. In Markets, Forecasts-Silicon Anode, Solid-State, Sulphur, Lithium–Air, Sodium–Ion and Magnesium batteries, and Lithium Capacitors (IDTechEx, 2015). Available at: http://www.idtechex.com/research/reports/advanced-and-post-lithium-ion-batteries-2016-2026-technologies-markets-forecasts-000449.asp (accessed August 18, 2017).
14. 10 Hot Consumer Trends 2016, Erricsson Consumer Lab, 2015.
15. Stephan A., Schmidt T.S., Bening C.R., and Hoffmann V.H.: The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: Patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan. Res. Policy 46, 709723 (2017).
16. Kirchberger M.A. and Pohl L.: Technology commercialization: A literature review of success factors and antecedents across different contexts. J. Technol. Transfer 41, 10771112 (2016).
17. Giniatullina A., Boorsma M., Mulder G-J., and van Deventer S.: Building for big pharma. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 284287 (2013).
18. Venture Capital Database, Insights, C., 2016. Available at: https://www.cbinsights.com/venture-capital-database (accessed August 18, 2017).
19. Gaddy B.E., Sivaram V., Jones T.B., and Wayman L.: Venture capital and cleantech: The wrong model for energy innovation. Energy Policy 102, 385395 (2017).
20. Laslau C.: What It Really Costs to Commercialize New Battery Technology: Lessons From More than a Decade of Investment Data (Luxresearch, 2016). Available at: https://members.luxresearchinc.com/research/report/20491 (accessed August 18, 2017).
21. Ciez R.E. and Whitacre J.F.: The cost of lithium is unlikely to upend the price of Li-ion storage systems. J. Power Sources 320, 310313 (2016).
22. Lacey S.: Stem CTO: Lithium-ion battery prices fell 70% in the last 18 months. Available at: https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/stem-cto-weve-seen-battery-prices-fall-70-in-the-last-18-months (accessed March 10, 2017).
23. Best Practices: Intellectual property protection in China (2016). Available at: https://www.uschina.org/reports/best-practices-intellectual-property-protection-china/ (accessed March 10, 2017).
24. Research N.: Materials for advanced batteries (2016). Available at: https://www.navigantresearch.com/research/materials-for-advanced-batteries (accessed March 10, 2017).
25. Chung D., Elgqvist E., and Santhanagopalan S.: Automotive lithium-ion cell manufacturing: Regional cost structures and supply chain considerations. Contract 303, 2753000 (2016).
26. Cobalt (2017). Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt-/media/File:Kobalt_electrolytic_and_1cm3_cube.jpg (accessed March 14, 2017).
27. Black Powder (2017). https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Black_Powder-1.JPG (accessed August 8, 2017).
28. Prototype of 75 watt-hour lithium-ion polymer battery (2017). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#/media/File:NASA_Lithium_Ion_Polymer_Battery.jpg (accessed August 8, 2017).
29. Chevy Volt First Battery (2017). https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36091953 (accessed August 8, 2017).
31. Samsung SDI Research & Development (2016). Available at: http://www.samsungsdi.com/about-sdi/research-development.html (accessed February 5, 2017).
32. LeVine S.: The story of the invention that could revolutionize batteries—and maybe American manufacturing as well (2015). Available at: http://qz.com/433131/the-story-of-the-invention-that-could-revolutionize-batteries-and-maybe-american-manufacturing-as-well/ (accessed February 5, 2017).
33. Parrish M.: How the Dow-DuPont Merger Will Impact the Chemicals Industry (2016). Available at: http://www.chem.info/article/2016/03/how-dow-dupont-merger-will-impact-chemicals-industry (accessed February 5, 2017).
34. Hogg S.: Why So Many VC Firms Invest in the Same Companies (2013). Available at: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/227144 (accessed February 5, 2017).
35. Association, N. V. C.: NVCA yearbook, Thomson Financial Venture Economics, 2015.
36. Gilead Sciences Announces First Quarter 2016 Financial Results (2016). Available at: http://www.gilead.com/news/press-releases/2016/4/gilead-sciences-announces-first-quarter-2016-financial-results (accessed February 5, 2017).
37. BioPharm America (2016). Available at: https://ebdgroup.knect365.com/biopharm-america/ (accessed February 5, 2017).
38. Eheman K.E. Jr.: Planning for the exit. Nat. Biotechnol. 30, 132134 (2012).
39. Brennan Z.: Final Rule on Clinical Trial Transparency: Will it be Enough to Encourage More Compliance? (2016). Available at: http://raps.org/Regulatory-Focus/News/2016/09/16/25867/Final-Rule-on-Clinical-Trial-Transparency-Will-it-be-Enough-to-Encourage-More-Compliance/ (accessed February 5, 2017).
40. ClinicalTrials.gov (2016). Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (accessed February 5, 2017).
41. Martino M. and Myers C.: Top Venture Capital Firms. Available at: http://www.fiercebiotech.com/special-report/top-venture-capital-firms (accessed February 5, 2017).
42. Samsung invests in XG Sciences, to co-develop graphene-based batteries (2014). Available at: http://www.graphene-info.com/samsung-invests-xg-sciences-co-develop-graphene-based-batteries (accessed February 5, 2017).
43. 24M Delivers Initial Quantity of Production-size Semisolid Lithium-ion Cells to NEC Energy Solutions for Testing and Validation. 24M, 2016.
44. Pentland W.: Canadian Battery Startup is Succeeding Where U.S. Startups Have Mostly Failed (2015). Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2015/11/16/canadian-battery-startup-is-succeeding-where-u-s-startups-have-mostly-failed/-34e79ea6c9cd (accessed February 5, 2017).
45. Key Dates in A123 Systems History (2012). Available at: https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2012/10/16/key-dates-systems-history/b1L4ec7Hjp2DYExc1spOEN/story.html (accessed February 5, 2017).
46. Gereffi G., Trigg T., and Lowe M.: Case Study: A123 Systems Local Markets and Competitiveness a Value Chain Analysis (Duke University, Durham, NC, 2010). Available at: http://www.cggc.duke.edu/pdfs/CGGC_A123_CaseStudy_10-22-10.pdf (accessed August 18, 2017).
47. Chain Reaction Innovation is DOE’s Newest Investment in the Clean Energy Innovation Ecosystem (2016). Available at: https://energy.gov/eere/amo/articles/chain-reaction-innovation-doe-s-newest-investment-clean-energy-innovation (accessed March 12, 2017).
48. Damodaran A.: Margins by Sector (US). NYU Stern, 2016.
49. Spending of U.S. pharmaceutical industry for research and development as a percentage of total revenues from 1990 to 2015 (2016). Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/265100/us-pharmaceutical-industry-spending-on-research-and-development-since-1990/ (accessed February 5, 2017).
50. Expected global market share of lithium battery makers in 2016. Statistica, 2016.
51. Panasonic Annual Report 2014 (Panasonic Corporation, 2014); p. 2. Available at: https://www.panasonic.com/global/corporate/ir/pdf/panasonic_ar2014_e.pdf (accessed August 18, 2017).
52. SDI, S.: Research & Development (2016). Available at: http://www.samsungsdi.com/about-sdi/research-development.html (accessed March 5, 2017).
53. LG CHEM Annual Report 2015, LG Chem, 2015.
54. Fact Sheet: New Drug Development Process, California Biomedical Research Association.
55. Waring M.J., Arrowsmith J., Leach A.R., Leeson P.D., Mandrell S., Owen R.M., Pairaudeau G., Pennie W.D., Pickett S.D., Wang J., Wallace O., and Weir A.: An analysis of the attrition of drug candidates from four major pharmaceutical companies. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 14, 475486 (2015).
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

MRS Energy & Sustainability
  • ISSN: 2329-2229
  • EISSN: 2329-2237
  • URL: /core/journals/mrs-energy-and-sustainability
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 464
Total number of PDF views: 701 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1492 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 6th September 2017 - 22nd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.