Advanced Materials Innovation E-Book

Sanford L. Moskowitz

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 956

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016

Beschreibung

Through detailed case studies of the most important advanced material creations of the latter 20th and early 21st century, the author explores the role of the field of advanced materials in the technological and economic activity today, with implications to the innovation process in general. * A comprehensive study that encompasses the three major categories of advanced material technologies, i.e., Structural Materials (metals and polymers), Functional Materials (transistor, microchip and semiconductor laser) and Hybrid and New Forms of Matter (liquid crystals and nanomaterials). * Extensive use of primary sources, including unpublished interviews with the scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs on the front lines of advanced materials creation * Original approach to case study narrative, emphasizing interaction between the advanced material process, perceived risk and directing and accelerating breakthrough technology

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Title Page

Copyright

Dedication

Preface

P.1 Some Questions and Why This Book?

P.2 Selecting the Case Study Innovations

P.3 Book Organization and Sources

References

Acknowledgments

Part I: Introduction and Background

Chapter 1: Advanced Materials Innovation: An Overview

1.1 The Advanced Materials Revolution

1.2 The Economic Impact of Advanced Materials

1.3 Advanced Material Innovation: The Main Players

References

Part II: Structural Materials

Chapter 2: Advanced Casting Technology: Ultrathin Steel and the Microalloys

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Background

2.3 Nucor Steel: Ground Zero for the Mini (and Micro-)-Mill Revolution

2.4 Thin Slab and Thin Strip Casting: Research and Development

2.5 Thin Slab and Thin Strip Casting: Scale-Up

2.6 Thin Slab and Thin Strip Casting: Commercialization

References

Chapter 3: High-Pressure Technology and Dupont's Synthetic Fiber Revolution

3.1 Background: The High-Pressure Process and Advanced Materials

3.2 Dupont's Nylon Revolution

3.3 Nylon's Children: Orlon and Dacron

References

Chapter 4: Low-Temperature (Interfacial) Polymerization: DuPont's Specialty Fibers Versus General Electric's Polycarbonate Revolution

4.1 Introduction and Background

4.2 Dupont and Specialty Fibers

4.3 General Electric and the Polycarbonates

References

Chapter 5: Fluidization I: From Advanced Fuels to the Polysilicones

5.1 Background: Fluidization and Advanced Fuels

5.2 General Electric and the Polysilicones

References

Chapter 6: Fluidization II: Polyethylene, the Unipol Process, and the Metallocenes

6.1 Background: Polyethylene and the Dupont Problem

6.2 Union Carbide and the Polyolefins: The Unipol Process

6.3 The Unipol Revolution and the Metallocene Polymers

References

Part III: Functional Materials

Chapter 7: Advanced Materials and the Integrated Circuit I: The Metal-on-Silicon (MOS) Process

7.1 Background

7.2 Bell Labs and the Point-Contact Transistor

7.3 Shockley Semiconductor and the Junction Transistor

7.4 Fairchild Semiconductor: The Bipolar Company

7.5 The MOS Technology at Bell and Fairchild

References

Chapter 8: Advanced Materials and the Integrated Circuit II: The Silicon Gate Process—The Memory Chip and the Microprocessor

8.1 Background: Creating Intel

8.2 The MOS-SG Process: Research and Early Development

8.3 The MOS-SG Process: Development Phase—Perfecting the Process

8.4 The MOS-SG Process: Product Development

8.5 MOS-SG: Scale-Up and Commercialization

References

Chapter 9: The Epitaxial Process I: Bell Labs and the Semiconductor Laser

9.1 Background: Advanced Materials, the Epitaxial Process, and Nonsilicon-based Microchips

9.2 Bell Labs and the Semiconductor Laser

References

Chapter 10: The Epitaxial Process II: IBM and the Silicon–Germanium (SiGe) Chip

10.1 IBM and its research

10.2 IBM and the Silicon–Germanium Chip

References

Part IV: Hybrid Materials and New Forms of Matter

Chapter 11: Product-Oriented Materials I: Liquid Crystals and Small LC Displays—the Electronic Calculator and the Digital Watch

11.1 Background

11.2 RCA and Liquid Crystal Research

11.3 Small LCD Development, Scale-up, and Commercialization I: US Start-ups Spin-off

11.4 Europe and Liquid Crystals

11.5 Small LCD Development, Scale-up, and Commercialization II: Japan

References

Chapter 12: Product-oriented Materials II: Liquid Crystals, Thin-Film Transistors, and Large LC Displays—Flat-screen Televisions and Personal Computers

12.1 Background

12.2 TFTs: Initiation, Research, and Early Development

12.3 Large LCDs: Development, Scale-up, and Commercialization

References

Chapter 13: Nanomaterials: The Promise and the Challenge

13.1 Background

13.2 Nanotubes: Discovery and Early Research

13.3 Nanotubes: Later Research and Early Development

13.4 Nanotubes: Later Development and Scale-up

13.5 Nanotubes—commercialization: The Case of Bayer Materials Science

References

Part V: Conclusion

Chapter 14: Risks, Champions, and Advanced Materials Innovation

14.1 The Major Task Milestones in Advanced Materials Creation

14.2 “Underground” Versus “Aboveground” Advanced Materials Innovation

14.3 Underground Advanced Materials Creation: General Electric and Union Carbide

14.4 Aboveground Advanced Materials Creation and the “Gauntlet of Risks”

14.5 The Structural Context and Advanced Materials Innovation

14.6 Inventors and Champions

14.7 The Different Types of Advanced Materials Champions

14.8 Final Thoughts and Implications

References

Index

End User License Agreement

Pages

xvii

xviii

xix

xx

xxi

xxii

xxiii

xxiv

xxv

xxvi

xxvii

xxviii

1

17

143

243

315

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456

457

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Preface

Part I: Introduction and Background

Begin Reading

List of Illustrations

Chapter 3: High-Pressure Technology and Dupont's Synthetic Fiber Revolution

Figure 3.1 Wallace Carothers (on the left) on a fishing trip in 1925, with his friend and fellow organic chemist Carl Marvel. Picture was taken a few years prior to Carothers beginning his pioneering work at DuPont.

Chapter 13: Nanomaterials: The Promise and the Challenge

Figure 13.1 Richard Smalley's AP2 experimental machine: clusters are made by vaporizing material from a disk and analyzed in a mass spectrometer

Figure 13.2 Richard Smalley's highly stable 60-atom cluster peak (shown increasingly dominant by adjusting the flow of helium)

Figure 13.3 The soccer ball structure of buckminsterfullerene (“buckyball”) showing alternating patterns of hexagons (6-sided figure) and pentagons (5-sided figure)

Figure 13.4 The Kratschmer–Huffman apparatus created carbon vapor when graphite rods were heated by an electric current

Chapter 14: Risks, Champions, and Advanced Materials Innovation

Figure 14.1 Gauntlet of perceived risk flowchart

Figure 14.2 Aboveground innovation and the structural context

Figure 14.3 The easy path model of Nucor and Fairchild (Noyce/Moore regime)

Figure 14.4 The difficult path model of DuPont and Fairchild (“Mahogany Row” regime)

List of Tables

Preface

Table P.1 Classification of the Major Advanced Materials Innovations

Chapter 1: Advanced Materials Innovation: An Overview

Table 1.1 Major Advanced Material Innovations: Materials and Related Devices

4

1913–2015

Table 1.2 Impact of Advanced Materials in Major Sectors of the US Economy of the Developed

6

(% Contribution to Performance Growth)

Table 1.3 Advanced Materials and Their Processes

Chapter 14: Risks, Champions, and Advanced Materials Innovation

Table 14.1 The Major Task Milestones of Advanced Materials Creation

Table 14.2 Underground Versus Aboveground Advanced Materials Creation: Major Characteristics

Table 14.3 Underground Versus Aboveground Advanced Materials Creation: A Comparison of the “Pros” and “Cons”

Table 14.4 Underground Versus Aboveground Advanced Materials Creation: The Structural Context and Comparison of the Major Task Milestones

Table 14.5 Underground Versus Aboveground Advanced Materials Creation: Firm and Project Characteristics

Table 14.6 Underground Innovation Process: “Bottom-Up” Case-Building Sequence for GE's Polycarbonates and Union Carbide's Unipol Process

Table 14.7 Aboveground Innovation Process: The Gauntlet of Perceived Risks

Table 14.8 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation: The Gauntlet of Risk Case Study Results—Project Terminations and Completions

Table 14.9 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase I: Initiation—“Relevancy” Risk

Table 14.10 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase II: Early Research—Intellectual Risks

Table 14.11 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase III: Late Research—“Resource Minimization” Risks

Table 14.12 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase IV: Early Development—“Prototyping” Risks

Table 14.13 Elastic Versus Inelastic Processes: Concept and Illustrations from the Mechanical World

Table 14.14 The Elasticity Spectrum of Advanced Material Processes

Table 14.15 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase V: Late Development—Technology–Market Interaction Risks

Table 14.16 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase VI: Scale-Up Phase—“Scaling” Risk

Table 14.17 Aboveground Advanced Materials Innovation Phase VII: Commercialization Phase—“Cultural Risks”

Table 14.18 Inventors and Champions and Their Role in the Phases of Innovation

Table 14.19 Characteristics of Successful Versus Less Successful Champions

Advanced Materials Innovation

Managing Global Technology in the 21st century

Sanford L Moskowitz

Copyright © 2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey

Published simultaneously in Canada

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, [phone], fax [phone], or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, [phone], fax [phone], or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at [phone], outside the United States at [phone] or fax [phone].

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication has been applied for.

ISBN: 9780470508923

In memory of my parents,

Dr. Fred Moskowitz (1919–1964) & Rose Surval Moskowitz (1925–2004)

Preface

Few areas of human endeavor play such a large role in the technological and economic activity of society today as the field of advanced materials. More scientists and engineers devote their professional lives in pursuit of them, more businessmen and government agencies have taken a serious interest in nurturing them, and more venture capitalist and financial firms have poured money into startups formed around them than ever before. And never before has the advanced materials arena extended so globally, with Europe and even more Asia playing an increasingly important part in this century's advanced material saga.

Certainly, advanced materials have been with us since man's earliest experiments in creating civilization. Whole eras in fact have been named for them, as our classifications of the “iron” age, “copper” age and “bronze” age attest. Historians of technology tell us of the great importance of advanced materials—especially the new steels coming out of the giant blast furnaces of England and the US—in the industrial revolution of the ninetieth and early 20th centuries. But today, in the first quarter of the 21st century, never has the potential of advanced materials seem so important, and indeed crucial to human existence. Mobile electronic technology, molecular and quantum computing, optical communications, alternative energy sources, the biotechnology revolution, robotics and automation, virtual reality and three dimensional printing, not to mention fundamental transformations in transportation, manufacturing and infrastructure all receive significant attention by the business, trade and general press because they are poised to fundamentally alter the nature of our lives in this century and beyond. All of these technologies and the changes they make in our world depend vitally on progress made within the advanced material landscape. At their core are increasingly powerful microchips, tiny lasers, energy-efficient batteries, smart textiles and metals, super strong and lightweight composites and alloys, superconducting materials, electronic displays, conducting polymers, all of which depend directly or indirectly on our ability to come up with new and more sophisticated materials and the processes to make them. In 2006, a study by the Rand Corporation called The Global Technology Revolution 2020 identified 16 major areas of innovation that would by 2020 “…enjoy a significant market demand…affecting multiple sectors (e.g., water, food, land population, governance, social structure, energy health, economic development, education, defense and conflict, and environment and pollution).”1 A full 75% of the innovations on the list depend directly on progress in advanced material technology. A recent White House report on innovation and industrial competitiveness reminds us of the critical importance of advanced materials technology for the present century:

…the development of advanced materials will fuel many of the emerging industries …Advanced materials are essential to economic security and human well-being, with applications in multiple industries, including those aimed at addressing challenges in clean energy, national security, and human welfare…Since the 1980s, technological change and economic progress have grown ever more dependent on new materials development.2

It should come as no surprise then that companies, governments, and investors should be scouting around for the next big thing in advanced materials. Many research initiatives are emerging from universities, others from corporate research and development departments and a few from government laboratories. The list is long and varied and includes such intriguing prospects as shape memory polymers, special ceramics for absorbing oxygen, architectural “smart” materials, power generating fibers, new films and coatings, fire-resistant paper, biorefined adhesives, and structural nanocomposites. One of the most fascinating possibilities is something which Caltech researchers call “3-Dimensional Architected Structural Meta-Materials.” These potential materials of the future will, if realized, allow planes, cars, bridges and other structures to be hundreds of times lighter than they currently are but with the same strength and superior operating characteristics.3

P.1 Some Questions and Why This Book?

So what are we to make of this abundance of possibilities? Certainly, the sort of the aforementioned research holds great scientific interest. But so many of these projects never successfully leave the university, the company research department or government laboratory. In other words, they never are able to cross that “dead man's zone” separating promising science from real-world technology. This doesn't mean attempts aren't made. In many cases, such research leads to the creation of a startup, usually close by a major university. Patents are licensed out, investors pursued, personnel rounded up, and facilities and equipment secured. In some cases, a larger, established firm buys the technology and creates or makes use of an internal venture group with the aim of nurturing, developing and commercializing the product or process. Recently, for example, Bayer Chemical created a special group to commercialize nanotube technology. But despite these efforts, few of these well-intentioned ventures ever see the light of day in the marketplace. Bayer understands this all too well, for in 2014 it abandoned its nanotube venture. In other cases, the company that invents the new material often is not the one to market it, thus missing out on the fruits of its creation. While RCA, for instance, invented the first liquid crystal display, it never commercialized the most important liquid crystal technology, flat panel displays for TVs, nor, as it turns out, did any American firm. This honor went to the Japanese and South Koreans.

What then determines whether or not a promising laboratory invention actually becomes a robust, fully formed market technology “with legs” and whether this transition from idea to working system can be accomplished in a timely manner? Certainly venture capitalists and corporate investors need to know where and when to place their bets; established firms looking to “buy into” new technology need to know what sort of startup it should purchase or what sort of partner it should do business with; For its part, the startup and small firm focused on that one technology and looking to share the risks with—and obtain more resources from—a corporate sponsor, need to know which company offers the best opportunity for its “baby” to grow into a fully mature and profitable adult; Academics and business scholars specializing in the innovation process need—or at least want—to know what factors are responsible for the rate, direction and timing of new technology; and government very much needs to know how to keep advanced materials innovation, so important for a nation's global competitiveness, flowing from the research laboratory to the production plant and market arena. In that same White House report quoted above, we also can read the importance the US government places in finding ways to keep new materials technologies pouring into the American economy:

…the time it takes to move a newly discovered advanced material from the laboratory to the commercial market place remains far too long. Accelerating this process could significantly improve U.S. global competitiveness and ensure that the Nation remains at the forefront of the advanced materials marketplace… [it is important that the US finds a way] to discover, develop, manufacture and deploy advanced materials in a more expeditions and economical way.4

And so I come to the reason for this book, which, simply put, hopes to find some of the answers to the questions posed above. The possible causes for success or failure, speed or sluggishness of innovation are well known and focus on such things as knowledge, capital, resources, organization, demand, skills, foresight, and risk-taking. It is not my intention to pit one or two of these against the others and declare these favorites to be the answer to the innovation question. Nor is it my aim to construct an all-encompassing “model of innovation” so much favored by academics and business scholars—and many business writers outside the Academy as well—or to attack as insufficient any such models that others have carefully and scrupulously developed from their specific case studies and data bases. My goal is much less ambitious. I simply want to narrate in as much detail as I can stories of important 20th and 21st century advanced material innovations and from these tales of technology creation—and failure—glean some common themes and conclusions that can help venture capitalists, established corporations, startups, government and even business scholars find some of the answers to why and how early and exciting research efforts manage—or mismanage—their way across the dreaded “valley of death”. Success in surviving the voyage often prove a boon to the companies that made it across and, in some cases, transform the world; those that fumble just as often drag the innovators down with them and are soon forgotten as just once great ideas that failed to launch. Whether then a promising material such as a graphene shakes up the world or is relegated to the dust bin of history will likely depend on whether its champions attend to the lessons that emerge from the case studies presented in the following pages.

P.2 Selecting the Case Study Innovations

But, if I am going to tell the stories of advanced materials innovation, which ones are to be selected for the spot light? So many of the most interesting ones—and the ones that receive so much attention in the press—are still in process, their outcomes uncertain. A case in point is graphene mentioned above. It has received so much publicity of late that it would seem to be a good candidate for a case study. But whether or not it actually becomes a major commercial product is still in question. Thus there is no way to know whether the history of this material—or any of the many other excellent advanced material prospects—as of this writing (2016) will lead to success, failure or just plain limbo (neither a clear success or failure) and so no way to make reasonable conclusions over what makes a company—or country—rise or fall in its quest for a particular new material technology. But what we do have is a record of technologies in the 20th and 21st centuries that have gone through all or most of their innovation cycles. These provide enough material to decide which companies make good on their early research and which falter, and why some flourish as others stumble. These then allow conclusions to be drawn as to the likely commercial success of current and future research and development efforts, where they are most likely to succeed and where to fail.

This book is interested in telling the stories of, quite simply, the most important advanced material innovations of the last few decades. Recent discussions on the distinctions between radical, breakthrough and disruptive technology, important as they are from a theoretical viewpoint, do not much concern us here. Suffice it to say, the innovations highlighted in this book are, arguably, the chief advanced material technologies in recent times. I have relied on the trade and business press and on historical opinion to tell me that, when it comes to advanced materials, these are “the essentials.” They are generally characterized as a “revolution” or “high water mark”—or some such expression—in the history of modern innovation. They mark a big leap in technological knowhow and generally have made a major impact on the market and even society. Of course, in any such list, a bone or two could be picked over a particular entry included, another left out. However, I believe that, on the whole, this list of innovation will stand the test of scrutiny.

Table P.1 presents the classification of the advanced materials (left column) and the specific major advanced material innovations that we will explore in this book.

Table P.1 Classification of the Major Advanced Materials Innovations

The narratives of these important advanced material technologies, while each interesting in and of itself, together paint a picture and expose a common pattern of how and why some companies succeed while others fail in creating and commercializing crucial advanced materials. But which ones are the likely winners in the innovation game is still in debate; each type of firm has its strengths and its shortcomings. It is a common belief that large established corporations are too bureaucratic and tied to their current product line to innovate while smaller firms are more nimble and more likely to take the risks to introduce radically new, truly groundbreaking technologies. However, these startups and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) often lack the necessary resources available to the big organization and so often fail to achieve their ambitious goals. The idea of combining the large corporation and high-technology start up—to form what one book calls the “Start Up Corporation”—is very intriguing.5 A resource-rich organization possessing the flexibility and far-sightedness of a small firm is clearly an enticing prospect and certainly a very promising approach. But even in this hybrid situation, doubts arise, especially when the company faces financial pressures. In this case, with immediate problems with which to deal, it is likely not to care very much about its future technological position. Just as a drowning man is more likely to grab a life jacket rather than a volume of Shakespeare, so a company in trouble—needing all the resources it has to maintain a current market position—will abandon the incubator, innovation hub and other experiments in internal innovation and divert the men and money being devoted to them to more pressing needs of the moment, that is, existing customers willing to spend their money now on proven products and services. Moreover, what constitutes hardship varies from one organization to another depending on external conditions, such as the general economy and a company's customer base, and its internals, which is its management, culture and organization. In other words, many situations will exist that will provoke even the most technologically savvy start up corporation to slip into a deep conservatism in response to what it perceives to be a major and immanent threat to its very existence.

The creation and use of incubators, innovation hubs and other approaches to heighten the technological dynamism of an established company tell managers what they should do to remain competitive in the 21st century. But what these putative solutions do not address is the question of how to keep the innovation process moving forward when a company—or a venture group within that company—faces the reality of desperate times and senior management feels compelled—even against its better judgement—to dismantle the very structures that many believe keep innovation moving forward.

But, in fact, a close look at the course of innovation within our advanced material technology cases underscore a very important point about real-world innovation: it often takes place under quite difficult conditions. Thus, the company faces declining revenue, the initial reason for conducting an R&D project evaporates, no business unit can be found to support a project, valued customers demand a project terminated because the new product will directly compete in their markets, these are just some of the roadblocks put in the way of new material creation. Yet, in many of these cases the established company, even without the benefit of incubators, innovation hubs, and internal venturing groups ended up producing—and profiting from—a breakthrough advanced material technology, while many companies that did have these structures in place did not. What accounts for these strange, unexpected results and how can investors, companies and governments best direct their resources to optimize the chance of successfully creating important 21st century advanced materials and rapidly introducing them into the market? These are the questions that concern us throughout the remainder of this book.

P.3 Book Organization and Sources

Organizing a book such as this poses some unique difficulties. One obvious organizational approach is to proceed chronologically. But the types of material technologies that would be included in any reasonable time period seemed to be somewhat chaotic as they encompass such wildly different products as, say polymers and steel. It would also be difficult to find conceptual ideas that might link different sorts of materials over time. It would be convenient, for example, to show how the earlier innovations came out of large corporate R&D while, as time went on, the university-based startup took over advanced material innovation. While there is some truth to this in that many startups and smaller firms attempted new technology over the course of the last century, we still find very important instances of large corporate R&D coming out with breakthroughs, such as Union Carbide's revolution in the polyolefins and metallocene polymers fairly late, that is in the 1980s and 1990s. An alternative, and more profitable, organizational approach is by type of advanced material technology. While there are different ways this can be done, it seemed most economical to divide the major sections or parts of the book into the three main product groups—structural, functional and hybrid—and the chapters themselves into the key processes used to create these products.

P.3.1 The Main Sections (or Parts) of the Book: The Product Categories

This book arranges the vast universe of advanced materials into three major categories: structural, functional, and hybrids. The first refers to metals, plastics and composites that are generally used in making parts and components for cars, planes, buildings, bridges, roads as well as for such biomedical applications as synthetic bones, muscles, tissues and organs. Functional materials are those semiconductor technologies that power solid state electronic devices such as transistors, microchips and solid state lasers. The third category—the hybrids—highlight the new forms of matter that have multiple uses. These materials enjoy applications that span both the structural and functional spaces. Nanotubes, for example, can be used to make the so-called nanocomposites (structural) as well as advanced microchips (functional).

P.3.2 The Chapters: The Major Processes

The advanced materials sector subsumes a wildly varied group of products to the extent that it is at first difficult to see how they can be studied in any coherent way at all. Yet, on closer study, we see that they can be grouped and categorized according to a relatively few common processes, or ways in which they are made. The chapters within each of the three sections of the book then are focused on such important process technologies as high-pressure catalysis, fluidization, low-temperature polymerization and so forth. It is important to stress that the advanced materials produced by a single process can be very different with respect to their applications and markets but can all be linked together by that common mode of production. For example, high pressure technology has produced structural materials as different as synthetic ammonia, nylon and nanotubes. Understanding that our material of interest, as important as it may be, is actually just one in a series of products turned out by a particular underlying process over time affords us a much deeper perspective on where our material came from, what went into its making, and how and why it itself spawns future breakthroughs. Take nylon for example. Contrary to popular belief, its story did not begin when Wallace Carothers began his experiments on a new type of polymer fiber. Because, as we shall see later on, the fundamental process behind nylon is high-pressure technology, we can only begin to understand DuPont's success in fibers by considering its earlier work in synthetic ammonia and organic chemicals, which made the company the world leader in high-pressure production and provided it with the essential knowledge, skills and technology to move into the first miracle fiber. In the same way, DuPont's ability to quickly build its famous Hanford plutonium plant for the Manhattan Project during World War II rested in no small measure on the high-pressure work it had perfected for nylon a few years earlier. Similarly, we cannot fully appreciate how Intel came up with its most important invention, the microprocessor, without grasping the company's earlier success in working out and applying the silicon gate process; this is the core method that first gave Intel the edge in semiconductor memories and only after learning how to accomplish this, allowed it to take on, a few years later, even bigger game, the microprocessor itself.

This more profound understanding of breakthrough innovation provided by a consideration of fundamental processes also, and very crucially, allows us to have a much better sense of the patterns of success and failure at the firm level. For example, both DuPont's triumphs (e.g., nylon) and its disappointments (e.g., polyethylene) depended a great deal on its attachment to its high pressure process. In a like manner, the legendary accomplishments of Intel and its total annihilation of its nearest and very capable competitor, Mostek, comes down to one simple fact: Intel held the secret to the silicon gate process (and thus to the microprocessor) while Mostek did not. Accordingly, each chapter shines the spotlight on a major process technology, its origins and its evolution as it creates different but technically related materials within a given product grouping (structural vs. functional), as displayed in Table P.1 above. The story then of each breakthrough material (e.g., polysilicones) will be told within the context of its associated process (e.g., fluidization).

P.3.3 Narratives of the Innovation Cycle

But how should the narratives of these materials be structured? Because we are talking about an evolution from idea to product, chronologically makes the most sense. However, rather than the units being days, months and years, we will follow each innovation project in units comprised of the “phases” of the innovation lifecycle. And so the case history narrative for each new material innovation discussed within its respective chapter follows the same general pattern. This “innovation cycle” extends from project initiation to production and first entrance into the market. The concept of “Research and Development” is a fairly wooly one. It is often used to mean conducting scientific investigations and turning the results into marketable products. But this is far from the case. In fact, conducting “R&D” gets us only half the way to that goal. The full innovation cycle consists of “Research,” “Development,” “Scale-Up,” and “Commercialization.” Accordingly, the story of innovation for each advanced material encompasses all four of these phases (or “RDS&C”). First exploring why and how a company began researching that particular advanced material technology, the story moves through the “research phase”, ending with creation of a working laboratory model, such as a reactor or device, demonstrating nothing less (or more) than feasibility of concept. A discussion of the “development phase” follows, which takes that laboratory model and works it up into a functioning prototype potentially capable of being expanded into a commercial unit. This prototype generally looks and behaves very differently from the crude laboratory model. The development phase can be viewed as the transition stage from laboratory science to real-world technology and, as such, often involves scientists and engineers working closely together. The “scaling up” phase follows and closes in on the all-critical transformation of the promising exemplar into a fully realized commercial technology, generally consisting of a working production unit making an advanced material (e.g., nylon, ultrathin Steel) or advanced material device (e.g., microprocessor, liquid crystal display). The “commercialization phase” completes the innovation lifecycle. It is concerned with the final formulation of a business model for the new technology, which is closely linked with a company's cultural make up and strategic outlook. Commercialization is generally an activity that is solidified and carried out just prior to entering the market. Certainly, while management—and even researchers—may begin thinking about and even developing portions of a business model as early as the research phase, they often have to alter their strategic vision for the technology over the course of the innovation sequence. During development and even scale up, for example, as they learn more about the nature of the technology and its place within the company's product portfolio, project champions and their superiors may change the type of markets to be approached or the position the technology ought to have on the relevant value chain. They may even decide against making the material or device after all, possibly sitting on its patents and preventing competitors from pursuing it. Whatever the case, only after (or possibly during) the building of a commercial plant will the corporate powers pin down the precise commercial strategy to be pursued; it is this latest iteration as the company first enters the market that defines the final phase of our innovation cycle.

Tracking these four phases of the innovation cycle for each of our major advanced material case studies is the best way to appreciate the various and changing difficulties that are placed in the way of success as a company struggles to bring a new and promising material to commercial existence. The difficulties and thus risks involved are unique across the different phases; the barriers encountered in conducting research are not at all the same as those facing the development team nor those challenging the engineers in charge of scaling a manufacturing facility. The different set of problems encountered along the road to market requires different talents and even personalities. Appreciating this reality as we study the rise (and often fall) of the innovative effort, allows us to see how the more agile firms manage to successfully negotiate the various difficulties they are forced to encounter throughout the cycle and, for those less nimble companies, to identify where such efforts tend to falter and why such failures happen.

P.3.4 Sources

This book ranges widely over the advanced materials landscape and so relies on many types of sources. Industry sources from my network of contacts in the field supplied important insights into the technical and economic aspects of both current and emerging materials. It has also benefitted immensely from the published work of others, especially those that are deeply researched and touch directly on areas crucial to our case studies. These include full-scale books, company histories and personal memoirs. Articles too contribute greatly to this work, including those that appear in the trade and business press. Primary material also comes into play throughout the book as do unpublished interviews of the major participants. For obvious reasons, these latter have supplied some of the most valuable details and insights, especially for those technologies that have not been given very much attention by scholars in the past. They are invaluable in coming to grips with the motivations and thinking of scientists, engineers, managers and businessmen who witnessed—and actively took part in—the innovation process first hand. These are vital in forcefully drawing attention to how the forces of risk, process and championship creatively interacted to introduce into the world new and groundbreaking advanced materials technology.

References

1. Silberglitt, R. (2006),

The Global Technology Revolution 2020: Bio/Nano/Materials/Information Trends, Drivers, Barriers, and Social Implications—Executive Summary

, Santa Monica, California: The RAND Corporation, p. 2.

2. National Science and Technology Council. (2011),

Materials Genome Initiative for Global Competitiveness

, Executive Office of the President's National Science and Technology Council: Washington, DC, pp. 3, 5.

3. Bourzac, K. (2015), “Nano-Architecture: A Caltech Scientist Creates Tiny Lattices with Enormous Potential,”

MIT Technology Review

.

http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/534976/nano-architecture/

. Accessed November 25, 2015.

4. National Science and Technology Council. (2011), p. 3.

5. See particularly Leifer, R. et al. (2000), Radical Innovation: How Mature Companies Can Outsmart Upstarts. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press and Davila, T. and Epstein, M. (2014),

The Innovation Paradox: Why Good Businesses Kill Breakthroughs and How They Can Change

: San Francisco, California: Barrett-Koehler Publishers.

Acknowledgments

Many of the unpublished interviews of scientists, engineers, managers, and corporate executives—as well as the papers of the nanomaterials pioneer and Nobel Laureate Richard Smalley—that have played an important part of this book belong to the Othmer Library and the Oral History Program of the Chemical Heritage Foundation (CHF, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania). The Foundation, as always, has been very helpful to me in accessing this material. I want to especially thank David J. Caruso, Director, The Center for Oral History, CHF, for his help in obtaining interview transcripts. DuPont's Hagley Library has also been of great help to me over the years in examining archival documents related to the chemical industry and technology, a number of which I have incorporated into this book. I want to also thank Melanie J. Mueller, Acting Director, Niels Bohr Library and Archives, American Institute of Physics (College Park, Maryland), for permission to use excerpts from their oral history of Eugene Gordon and Robert Colburn, Research Coordinator, IEEE History Center (Hoboken, New Jersey), for permission to quote from their oral history of Richard Petritz.

This book has made extensive use of published research when such materials have proven useful to the overall narrative of advanced materials. I need to particularly acknowledge the contributions of four very helpful works: David A. Hounshell and John Kenly Smith whose exhaustive study of DuPont R&D in their book Science and Corporate Strategy: DuPont R&D, 1902–1980 (Cambridge University Press, 1988) proved so useful to me in the chapters devoted to polymers within the section on “Structural Materials”; Ross Knox Bassett whose book To the Digital Age: Research Labs, Start-up Companies, and the Rise of MOS Technology (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002) added so much to my discussion of semiconductor technology in the chapters related to “Functional Materials”; Jeff Hecht and his story of fiber optics as told in The City of Light: The Story of Fiber Optics (Oxford University Press, 1999) made an important contribution to my narrative of the semiconductor laser and its role in fiber optics technology; and Bob Johnstone and his excellent account of how Asia became important competitors in advanced electronics in his book We Were Burning: Japanese Entrepreneurs and the Forging of the Electronic Age (Basic Books, 1999), a work that guided me in analyzing the rise and global development of liquid crystal device technology in the section of “Hybrids and New Forms of Matter.”

I also want to especially acknowledge the help of Robert Burgelman, Edmund W. Littlefield Professor of Management and Director of the Stanford Executive Program at Stanford University, during the writing of this book. Professor Burgelman was kind enough to review parts of my manuscript and to offer important insight that led especially to the structure and content of the final chapter. He has also been very helpful in directing me to extremely useful articles that have added considerably to the quality of the book.

The school where I teach, St. John's University and the College of St. Benedict (Collegeville, Minnesota), has helped me in many ways during the writing of this book. Through university grants, it provided me funds for research travel. Its interlibrary loan program under the coordination of Janine Lortz has proven invaluable in securing for me crucial articles and books I needed in a most timely and efficient manner. Its teaching assistants—and particularly Mattie Lueck—helped me design a number of tables and figures that I have used in this book. And its faculty and my colleagues have, as always, been totally supportive. I need to particularly single out Economics Professor Louis Johnston and Global Business Professor Lisa Lindgren for leading me to important documents and ideas and concepts that have greatly enriched my discussions and been of enormous help to me in forming my conclusions.

My editor for the book at John Wiley, Dr. Arza Seidel, has, as always, been supportive and very patient. While it has taken me longer than expected to finish this book, she has stood by it from the very beginning. She has, as with my first book, offered wise counsel, support, and encouragement throughput this project. I am most appreciative. Finally, I would like to thank my wife Becky for her sage advice and patient understanding during my writing of the book. As her mentor Pearl S. Buck wrote of her in For Spacious Skies: Journey in Dialogue, “Give us a hundred Beckys.”

Part IIntroduction and Background

Chapter 1Advanced Materials InnovationAn Overview

The world is in the midst of a global technology revolution…with the potential to bring about radical changes in all dimensions of life

.

The RAND Corporation, 2006

1.1 The Advanced Materials Revolution

The aforementioned quote comes from a 2006 study that focused most of all on advanced materials and their economic and social impact worldwide. The statement thus gives us a fair sense of the importance of advanced materials to man's future economic progress. Actually, advanced materials technology has been an integral part of society and its evolution for centuries. It is embodied in the extracting of coal or iron ore from the earth or creating new materials from combinations of the old, such as iron and carbon to produce steel. Less well known but extremely important were the German coal tar-based synthetics—dyes, drugs, industrial gases, and explosives—that dominated the world's demand for chemicals in the last quarter of the 19th and the first part of the 20th century. Germany's chemical supremacy culminated in the industry's greatest achievement up to that point: the Haber's synthetic ammonia process (1913).1

But even before the First World War, the United States had begun its ascendance in advanced materials. It had of course by then a large and technically sophisticated iron and steel industry in Western Pennsylvania. But by the 1890s, another region had opened up a whole new world of materials. Niagara Falls, because of the cheap energy it provided, developed into the first major US industrial cluster of the 20th century, companies like Alcoa, Union Carbide, and Carborundum first turned out advanced nonferrous metals, particularly aluminum, the first nickel “superalloys,” and the carbide family of metals for a growing number of industrial applications. Soon chemical companies moved in to produce organic synthetics using Niagara's cheap electrical power.2

The Niagara Falls area, in industrial decline for decades, would not be the last important advanced material center. The following table displays many of the major advanced material innovations according to year of introduction, category, company, and country (and in the case of the United States, region) from the start of the First World War to the present (2016). A number of trends can be identified. As expected, structural materials continued to control advanced materials innovation until the late 1940s. Polymers (and the intermediates that went into making them) soon began to dominate. This was the age of macromolecular technology, and the two ruling powers in this field were DuPont and (surprisingly given the nature of its core business) General Electric (GE). DuPont particularly—along with Union Carbide—created a very important advanced material region in West Virginia's Kanawha Valley. Raw materials in the form of coal and natural gas furnished the raw materials. Carbide depended on the ethane-rich gas to make its ethylene-based chemicals and plastics, while DuPont, much like the Germans, opted for the coal as its basic starting point. This region would prove remarkably fertile over the years as research conducted there turned out some of the most important new materials of the age, including the most prominent of them all, nylon. But Kanawha, like Niagara, turned out not to be the last word in American advanced materials. General Electric certainly proved this: it came out with revolutionary new polymers through the 1940s and 1950s without having to dip in the Kanawha well to do so. The table also shows the growing importance of the southwest and its oil fields in Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, which is where research on and early production of high octane fuel using fluid catalytic cracking—one of the most powerful advanced material processes—took place.3

We see then that during the first half of the 20th century, American advanced materials shifted geographically from the northeast (Pittsburgh and Niagara Falls) to the south (Kanawha Valley) and southwest (Gulf States) and did so in pursuit of abundant and cheap resources, whether energy or raw materials. Beginning in the late 1950s, the center of advanced materials—never content to stay in one place for too long—was on the move again, this time headed due west. The reason this time was to take advantage of another type of resource involving neither cheap power nor abundant fossil fuels but the free movement of ideas and knowledge and a growing source of capital—venture money—specifically tailored for high-technology enterprises. A whole new type of advanced material now entered the scene. Whereas the metals and polymers were made by the advanced materials producers and sold to fabricators of components and structures that in turn went to the construction, transportation, textile, machine tool, and a host of other industries large and small, the semiconductor company synthesized advanced semiconductor composites and from them created actual working devices—transistors, memory chips, microprocessors—that then were sold to original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), notably personal computer manufacturers. Semiconductor firms thus are active further up that value chain than are the steel and chemical companies. These functional materials began their upward ascent into history in the late 1940s with the invention of the transistor, which, along with nylon, is ranked as one of the most important inventions of the century. A whole new era now came to the fore. Today, we think of Silicon Valley as the place where money is made in the software field dominated by video games, social media, and internet services of all kinds. But Silicon Valley was created around companies like Shockley Semiconductor (defunct for decades), Fairchild Semiconductor (still with us as of 2017), and the mighty Intel (still the king of the chip). The people who powered these companies were not software designers but chemists, chemical engineers, applied physicists, and electrical engineers, and their business was materials and creating new and more sophisticated semiconductor devices. The transistor, integrated circuit and microprocessor, solid-state laser, and silicon–germanium chip are all advanced material composites made by very intricate processes with such names as metal on oxide, silicon gate, and epitaxy. This advanced material technology which creates ever more powerful microchips is absolutely necessary before there can be software, cloud computing, or any of the ever-growing number of social media venues that populate the 21st century IT landscape. We can say then that from the 1960s Silicon Valley evolved into another major American advanced materials region.

By the late 1970s, the advanced material situation becomes a great deal more complicated. New materials innovation was now more dispersed geographically, originating not only in the United States but internationally. Within the United States itself, former technology centers revived, at least temporarily, to issue extremely significant—indeed breakthrough—new technologies. In the late 1970s, many years after the great achievements of DuPont and GE, that other veteran chemical company Union Carbide introduced its pioneering polyolefin technology that breathed new life into American polymers. In the 1980s, long after the United States had been written off as a serious competitor in global steel, a relatively small company made a big breakthrough in advanced steelmaking and does so in a plant in Indiana, far from Pittsburgh and Big Steel. Thin slab (and later thin strip) casting technology that emerged from here completely revitalized steelmaking and put the United States back on the map as a major metals producer.

And this was not all. By the 1980s, we begin seeing the ascendance of an advanced material group including long overlooked materials and totally new forms of matter with commercial potential. These materials combined elements of both the structural and functional groups. Their increasing commercial importance underscores two significant trends that remain essential to this day: the growing ability of other countries—particularly Asian countries—to take what the United States and Europe invent but discard and make something economically important out of it (e.g., liquid crystal displays) and the rise of the “university research–technology transfer office–high-tech start-up” network as an engine for advanced materials innovation, as in the case of nanomaterials. While the small start-up commands growing attention in recent years, we cannot by any means discount the role of the big corporation in 21st century innovation.

A glance at Table 1.1 shows that large, established companies continued to turn out new and breakthrough materials into the last quarter of the 20th century. Today, companies like IBM and 3M have not shied away from pushing the envelope of new and sometimes path breaking technology. At the same time, many start-ups with loads of technical and business talent, impressive patent positions, and ties to deep-pocketed investors never did make it past the development stage. Understanding and accounting for these successes and these failures from such unexpected quarters is an important part of this book and is something we will take up after a brief look at the present and future impacts of advanced materials on major sectors of the economy.

Table 1.1 Major Advanced Material Innovations: Materials and Related Devices4 1913–2015

Advanced Material and Devices

Year

Advanced Material Category

Company

Country (Region)

Synthetic ammonia

1913

Structural

Badische (BASF)

Germany

Synthetic methanol and the advanced alcohols

1926

Structural

DuPont

United States (NE)

Nylon

1938

Structural

DuPont

United States (NE)

Polysilicones

1942

Structural

General Electric

United States (NE)

High octane (“fluid catalytic”) gasoline

1943

Jersey Standard (EXXON)

United States (SW)

Transistor

1947

Functional

AT&T/Bell Labs

United States (NE)

Rayon and Dacron

1953

Functional

DuPont

United States (NE)

Aramid fibers

1996

Functional

DuPont

United States

Polycarbonate plastics

1996

Functional

General Electric

United States (NE)

Integrated circuit: “DRAM” memory chip

1970

Functional

Intel

United States (SV)

Integrated circuit: microprocessor

1973

Functional

Intel

United States (SV)

Integrated circuit: “EPROM” memory chip

1974

Functional

Intel

United States (SV)

Advanced polyolefin plastics

1977

Structural

Union Carbide

United States (NE)

Liquid crystals: small panel displays

1975

Hybrid and new form of matter

Seiko

Japan

Nanomaterials: multiwalled nanotubes (MWNTs) and nanotube composites

1983

Hybrid and new form of matter

Hyperion Catalysis

United States (NE)

The metallocene polymers

1998

Structural

Union Carbide

United States (NE)

Germanium arsenide semiconductor complex: solid-state laser

1998

Functional

AT&T/Bell Labs

United States (NE)

Thin film transistor + liquid crystals: large panel display

1999

Hybrid and new form of matter

Sharp

Japan

Thin slab steel

1987

Structural

Nucor Steel

United States (MW)

Ultrathin steel and the microalloys

1997

Structural

Nucor Steel

United States (MW)

Silicon–germanium chip

1999

Functional

IBM

United States (NE)

Nanomaterials: “buckyballs” and single-walled nanotubes (SWNTs)

2000

Hybrid and new form of matter

Carbon Nanotechnologies

United States (SW)

Graphene

2016

Hybrid and new form of matter

Cambridge Nanosystems

United Kingdom

MW, Midwest United States; NE, Northeast United States; SE, Southeast United States; SV, Silicon Valley; SW, Southwest United States.

1.2 The Economic Impact of Advanced Materials

New materials have had a major economic impact on society for millennia. This influence has been especially strong over the course of the 20th century. To be sure, the very symbols of modern life—such as automobile, airplane, skyscraper, man-made textiles, computer, and atomic energy itself—all are deeply dependent on the regular availability of new and pioneering materials. There is little question that the improved performance that has occurred in most areas of economic life has been increasingly governed and even determined by breakthrough metals, polymers, semiconductors, and other advanced material technologies. In their book Abundance: The Future Is Better Than You Think, Peter Diamandis and Steven Kotler, quoting from a National Science Foundation report, emphasize the economic and social importance of just one class of advanced material: “Nanotechnology has the potential to enhance human performance, to bring sustainable development for materials, water, energy and food, to protect against unknown bacteria and viruses, and even to diminish the reasons for breaking the peace [by creating universal abundance].”5

But what has been and is likely to be the impact of advanced materials on the economy and society? There are of course many ways in which a sector or industry or individual company for that matter expands that may not involve the use of new material at all including innovations in design, organizing work, and revamping and applying old technology. But there is little question that advanced materials plays a growing role in the economic performance of the major industrial sectors operating within the developed world within the 20th and early 21st centuries and that this trend will likely continue—and indeed some believe accelerate—as the present century unfolds.

Table 1.2 shows the growing influence of advanced materials on the economic performance within six major US industrial sectors from 1980 to 2050. The table has evolved from discussions with experts in the field, conference presentations, as well as from data, information, and analysis from secondary literature including government studies and articles within the technical and business press. The numbers shown are the percentages of total progress in performance accounted for by the introduction of advanced materials alone within each industrial sectors over those seven decades. Naturally, the measure of performance differs across industries and technologies—improvement in the performance of automobiles is measured very differently than advances made in the efficiencies of solar panels. It is also important to understand that whether these projections actually come to fruition depends greatly on whether the promising advanced materials that are still in the research phase actually enter the market in a timely manner. It should not be a surprise that advanced materials impact industries with different levels of intensity. While information and communications technology (ICT) depends mightily on new materials, manufacturing and construction have more performance-improving options (such as new ways of organizing work, new building and machine design, and so forth). Nevertheless, throughout all these industries, the profound effect of new materials technology and the intensification of their influence over the next few decades are clearly evident.

Table 1.2 Impact of Advanced Materials in Major Sectors of the US Economy of the Developed6 (% Contribution to Performance Growth)

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Information and computer technology

25

40

55

60

65

68

73

75

Energy

*

15

30

45

50

55

60

65

70

Biotechnology and health care

10

13

20

25

33

45

55

65

Transportation

8

10

15

20

30

40

45

60

Construction and infrastructure

5

8

10

15

25

30

40

55

Manufacturing

3

6

8

12

20

25

35

50

* Not including energy savings realized by the transportation, construction, and infrastructure sectors.

The sections that follow discuss in more detail the current and projected advance material trends in these various industries. These promising materials are the ones that need to escape the confines of the research lab and enter the real world of the market if the trends depicted in the table are to come about.

1.2.1 Information and Computer Technology

Much will be said of the role of advanced materials in the information and computer technology sector in Part II of this book. For now, we can say that no area of modern technology has been so profoundly influenced by new materials as ICT. By all accounts, the key measure of progress in ICT is the ability of the central processing unit—the microprocessor—to continue to follow the path dictated by Moore's Law, that is, the statement that the microchip contains ever greater processing speed and power on a smaller and smaller piece of silicon.

Certainly, other factors must be considered as important for the growth of this sector, notably advances in circuit design and software engineering. However, there is little doubt that these essential technical activities must take a back seat to new materials for they would not be able to progress without the creation of more powerful microprocessors, and these, in turn, depend mightily on the development of new and more sophisticated advanced material processes capable of making breakthrough semiconductor composites that maintain the integrity of Moore's Law. The personal computer, mobile device, Internet, and even social media would not be possible without this. It is for this reason that many in the ICT industry assign such a large and rapidly increasing proportion of the sector's growth to new materials past, present, and yet to come. Regarding this last category, research is being conducted at universities in the United States and globally on new materials that will keep the ICT sector progressing toward ever smaller and more powerful devices. One example is the work being conducted at the University of Chicago on nanocrystals capable of being designed for extremely powerful computing technology known as quantum computing. By midcentury, it is fair to say that up to 80% of all ICT growth will depend on new materials, such as new types of silicon (e.g., strained silicon), nanomaterials (nanotubes and graphene), conducting polymers, and even DNA-based circuits. Without these and other advanced material innovations, Moore's Law will falter and no viable replacement will be forthcoming, a situation that will cause stagnation in every other activity associated with information and communications.

Nor does the influence of advanced materials in the ICT industry end with the wonders of the microchip. The personal computer and mobile device revolution could not exist without the flat screen. In this realm of ICT, performance is measured by a display that consumes less power and allows greater visual power and flexibility. Liquid crystals and, in a smaller way, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), have been the driving force in this technology. A newcomer in the field is the organic light-emitting diode (OLED). By 2050, these and other new materials will account for up to 75% of performance improvements made by the ICT industry.

1.2.2 Energy

Next to ICT, the energy field will be the main beneficiary of progress made in advanced materials. The economic and social consequences of climate change is a major factor in pushing efforts to find new and advanced energy technologies. Probably the area of energy technology receiving the most attention is solar. Efficiency, storage capacity, and cost-effectiveness are the critical areas of research, and this generally involves working in the advanced material arena. Over the past three decades, the costs of solar cells have been coming down because of progress made in materials engineering. Most importantly are advances made in making the silicon wafer that goes into the solar cell thinner and thinner. The crystalline silicon from which the wafer is made is the most expensive part of the device, and the less of it needed, the cheaper the cell. MIT engineers, for example, are exploring ways to increase the efficiency of solar panels so that, instead of constructing an entire roof as a solar panel, homeowners could have small solar cells attached in discrete locations on existing roof structures.7