Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

I attended the Corporate WaterVision 2010 Conference in Washington DC June 8-9.The sponsors appeared to be newbies to the water conference circuit–so I didn’t know what to expect.

I was pleasantly surprised.

I came away with two ideas in terms of best practices: One for desalination from Australia and the other for water reuse from Canada.

I’ll only spend a  couple sentences on desal  best practices from Australia because its too big a subject–and wasn’t part of the main theme of the conference–which was water reuse.   On Wednesday morning  Hu Fleming, Global Director of  Hatch Water gave a presentation on Australian desalination.    What I heard was  just amazing. I’d seen the first graph Hu presented in February at the Multi State Salinity Coalition Conference in Las Vegas. That graph contrasts vividly the 15 year conception-to-completion-cycle for Poisden’s Carlsbad desalination plant in southern California …. — to the 3 year conception-to-completion-cycle –  for all the many Aussie desal plants. (page 38)What I didn’t hear the last time was that in several instances the desal plants– during construction– were found to be coming in under time and under budget — so they doubled their capacity on the fly. How did they do that? (and still stay on time and on budget?) The first big one was 3D & 4D modeling (pg 42). The second big one was no fault, no blame, and no dispute commercial framework between the owners and service providers at all stages. (pg 46) There were others.

But that’s a long story. I asked Hu Fleming  if he would be willing to give the presentation again elsewhere.–& so would he mind if I posted  the  pdf (here) for his presentation and his email online. He was agreeable. The pdf is all publicly available info. His shop has had considerable dealings with Australia — so he’s intimately familiar with the story. If you have a conference and  are interested in having a presenter detail  Australia’s big desalination building projects — Hu’s email address is: hfleming@hatch.ca

imho the Australia story needs to be told and retold at every American desalination conference for years to come so that people will get the idea that it might be a good idea to adopt some Australia’s practices.

It took a little more thought to stitch together the second big theme of the conference. I was clued to an interesting Canadian story by an off handed comment  by  the last panelist of the last panel on Tuesday. The panel was entitled Sustainability Leaders II: Assessing Water Reuse and Other Innovative Water Solutions. The guy who made the comment was  Rishi Shukla, Ph.D.,  from the James R. Randall Research Center of Archer Daniels Midland Company.

He said Canada actually does a better job of converting water reuse ideas into profit making companies than the USA does. The way they do it is through a program called Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology Advancement ( OCETA).  According to their website

OCETA was incorporated in 1993 as one of three Canadian Environmental Technology Advancement Centres to strengthen and grow the environmental industry in Canada. OCETA is a private company that operates at arm’s length from government.

The core mandate of OCETA is to provide technical support and business services to entrepreneurs, start-up companies and small to medium-sized enterprises to support the commercialization of new environmental technologies, and to accelerate market adoption of clean technology and environmentally sustainable solutions.

OCETA  provides funding at a rate of 4 to 1 for start ups. That is, for every dollar the start-up invests OCETA provides four dollars.

The USA does have similar programs on the state levelEspecially prominent is Massachusetts.  To augment these programs a  May 2010  Brookings Institute Study recommended more programs by the federal government to provide access to to capital for entrepreneurial start ups. A Wednesday morning panel entitled; Steps Toward a National Reclaimed Water Standard addressed this. Panelist Jon Freedman, Global Government Relations Leader  for  GE mentioned that more federal funds for water reuse start ups would spur development.  As well, he mentioned that a number of GE suggested policy initiatives .

The USA does have small federal agencies that fund start ups for defense and intelligence. Pound for pound probably the best agency in the Federal Government in terms of payback to the economy is DARPA.  Their seed money has been meant to fund technology for DOD related industries — but, curiously, Darpa seed money has been  at the root of many great US companies since its inception in the 1950’s. In recent years DARPA has even funded carbon nanotube membrane research.

The WateReuse Research Foundation might serve a similar purpose as DARPA for the express purpose of channeling federal dollars to start ups that treat waste water –like municipal sewage as a resource–with an eye out to one day turning the waste output of municipalities into profit centers –rather than cost centers.

My favorite storm water idea is to pipe Mississippi flood water west rather than spend billions through FEMA and the Core of Engineer to dike the river.

But practical sewage water solutions are closer than most people currently understand.   Here is a waste lagoon in Utah that’s being converted into an algae biofuel production facility.  A prototype waste treatment plant in Hawaii –being deployed by American Water– promises operating cost savings of up to 70%. This article lists companies that extract various  resources including phosphorous and ammonia from waste treatment plants. In Sept 2009,

At the Water Innovations Alliance in Chicago, Mark Shannon, Director of the NSF STC WaterCAMPWS at the University of Illinois, sketched out a vision for a new type of water purification system that will convert sewage into re-usable water, methane and a sludge of minerals that can be sold to manufacturers or brick makers.

Shannon is currently in the midst of raising funds to build a prototype that would work with 20 liters at a time. The Solara in New York’s Battery Park neighborhood has a 580 water recovery units that work aerobically.

The minerals recovered include magnesium, boron, fly ash and lithium. Simbol Mining, a startup spun out of Lawrence Livermore, has a technique for extracting lithium from water. Right now, cities pay to have the stuff stored. El Paso, for instance, re-injects the salts and minerals from its desalination system back into the ground when it could conceivably sell them.

According to this May 21, 2001 article in Water Online– Biodiesel From Sewage Sludge [Is] Within Pennies A Gallon Of Being Competitive

With the challenges addressed, “Biodiesel production from sludge could be very profitable in the long run,” the report states. “Currently the estimated cost of production is $3.11 per gallon of biodiesel. To be competitive, this cost should be reduced to levels that are at or below [recent] petro diesel costs of $3.00 per gallon.”

Where would WateReuse Research Foundation find promising start ups and how would they vet them? The last speaker of the conference was Paul O’Callaghan, CEO, O2 Environmental Inc. He mentioned that his shop has a list of over 600 start ups in all stages of development. Interestingly their top choice for a company with game changer tech is Emefcy. According to their site:

Emefcy eliminates the energy consumption for wastewater treatment, by applying the principle of microbial fuel cells (MFC) for the direct production of electricity or hydrogen from wastewater.

So in total there are companies looking to turn municipal sewage into gas, oil, electricity and hydrogen.

The WaterReUse Research Foundation already provides money for basic research–so the institute is positioned to find promising technology moving into the start up phase.

Odds are there will be several municipal bankruptcies in the next couple years. Many if not most municipalities are financially challenged these days. As was pointed out by the Water Infrastructure Funding panel on Tuesday–the need for water infrastructure projects is great. There are currently initiatives in various phases of realization inside and outside congress to make municipal bonds more attractive. If municipal waste became a profit center– rather than a cost center–municipal bonds would be an easy sell.

All in all, it was a good conference. Remember for any conference you do– book Hu Fleming for a review of Australia desalination best practices. As well, consider that Canada’s OCETA & the DOD’s Darpa might serve as models for a federally funded water reuse start up initiative.

Before I get started let me show you some serious eye candy I found this past month. The noise to signal ratio for the last couple of years on global warming is running about 100/1. Here’s a very good explanation of why. Take a look at this National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) graphic of mean temperatures in the USA. Notice the sudden drop off at the end?

Here’s also a NASA graph of the sunspot cycle along with NASA’s prediction for when the sunspot cycle will turn up again.. It shows we’re at a solar minimum. Here’s something more interesting. Here’s a graphic that shows how NASA’s prediction of the next upturn in the solar cycle has changed since 2004. It keeps being pushed further out into the future. That might help to explain the increasing cacophony in the global warming debate.

It may well turn out to be that carbon dioxide will turn out to be a case of correlation without causation in the global warming debate. Here is the Best Discussion of Global Warming that I’ve ever seen.

I heard that some folks were pretty discouraged after MSSC conference in January. For that reason its kind of encouraging to see a bill introduced to congress that would accelerate the pace of desalination research along the terms discussed by the water energy conference in Janaury.
US bill seeks major desalination research expansion

US Senate hearings began on 10 March 2009 into a bill on the relationship between energy and water which could have wide implications for desalination research, both in the US and internationally.

I like the US part. I’m not sure what to make of the international part.  Right now major US desalination players like GE and IBM have already teamed up with overseas players. IBM has teamed up with Saudi Arabia and a Japanese company called Central Glassto do research. GE has teamed up with Singapore to set up a research facility there. I don’t think that GE or IBM could long play the international game as they have done — without maintaining some control over their IP. But I could be wrong. Right or wong the US is going to need to hold onto IP in order to get competitive advantage to change capital flows so we can pay our bills. The proper question framed appropriately for federal state & local officials up and down the chain of command is this: How do we grow our tax base. This is the way smart state governors think.

The hearings relate to a new bill introduced by the leaders of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee, Jeff Bingaman and Lisa Murkowski, titled Energy & Water Integration 2009. This seeks to order the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency, to arrange with the National Academy of Sciences for an in-depth analysis of the impact of energy development and production on the water resources of the United States.

Sounds good. No? The National Committee of Sciences will have a chance to make up for the disinterested report they put out last year.

However, more importantly for desalination, the bill seeks to authorize funds to enable the Secretary of the Interior to operate and manage the Brackish Groundwater National Desalination Research Facility in Otero County, New Mexico, as a state-of-the-art desalination research center. The center would develop new water and energy technologies with widespread applicability; and create new supplies of usable water for municipal, agricultural, industrial or environmental purposes.

Somebody got it right. Thank You. Now maybe in two years the US will have a dedicated desal and reuse laboratory on par with Saudi Arabia and Singapore. What’s most amazing about the bill is that the report they want produced is susposed to come out in 90 days:

If the bill is passed the Secretary of Energy would have 90 days to develop an ”Energy-Water Research and Development Roadmap to define the future research, development, demonstration and commercialization efforts that are required to address emerging water-related challenges to future, cost-effective, reliable and sustainable energy generation and production”.

I think this would be a good way to get all interested parties (including but not limited to the GOA, DOI, DOE, EPA)to release funds for various desalination and water reuse projects. The article continues:

As a priority, says the bill, renewable energy technologies should be developed for integration with desalination technologies:
# to reduce the capital and operational costs of desalination;
# to minimize the environmental impacts of desalination; and
# to increase public acceptance of desalination as a viable water supply process.

In addition, the bill wants:
# research regarding various desalination processes, including improvements in reverse and forward osmosis technologies;
# development of innovative methods and technologies to reduce the volume and cost of desalination concentrated wastes in an environmentally sound manner;
# an outreach program to create partnerships with US states, academic institutions, private entities and other appropriate organizations to conduct research, development and demonstration activities;
# an outreach program to educate the public on desalination and renewable energy technologies and the benefits of using water in an efficient manner.

I would add to this list that research be done on energy efficient cheaper to produce and maintain pipelines. The tool set for 3d prototyping is evolving faster than the materials & designs that can be used with it. As well, I would mention the OSTP report entitled “A Strategy for Federal Science and Technology to Support Water Availability and Quality in the United States September, 2007.” on the national challenges to ensure adequate fresh water supplies. The study then outlines a federal strategic plan for addressing these challenges and provides a guide for how federal agencies will be a part of this plan. I give more detail on that from a Jan 2008 MSSC blog.
I think that as part of that a helpful thing to do would be to include efficient reverse and forward osmosis membranes onto the list of strategic material research goals in the already architected NSF Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers. Heck I’d throw in easy to build and maintain energy efficient pipelines too. And don’t forget line item funding so these projects land inbox.
Anyhow, everyone would do well to do their part make this study go through.

I mentioned in a previous desalination post a bunch of ways that renewable energy projects could be integrated with desalination projects. As well, the Oasys forward osmosis project –that I mentioned in the last post — gives a body pause:

Oasys estimates that engineered osmosis will cost US$ 0.37-0.44/m³ once fully scaled up. The startup has so far established a pilot-scale plant to test the technology by producing 1 m³/d.

That’s $431@acre foot to $542.8@acre foot. When you consider that the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is charging $800@acre ft… Oasys numbers take on a whole new meaning. In fact, those meanings cut six ways to Sunday. Oasys mentions California in their press release

The company’s patented EOTM process can produce drinking water at less than half the cost of current desalination methods. This is accomplished by eliminating the need for high-pressures used in modern Reverse Osmosis (RO) systems, thereby reducing the electricity and fuel demands by more than 90%. The result is a reduction in the economics of seawater desalination that will ultimately bring the cost of producing water from our vast oceans below the cost of conventional surface water, such as the aqueduct system used in the California State Water Project

To get those low numbers Oasys forward osmosis system has to use waste heat from sources like coal plants plants near the coast.

Now combine Oasys work with this: (Click) Here’s break through in production costs for algae oil.

A coal plant — that can also produce fresh water and carbon neutral oil…– is golden.

There will be a congressional hearing on algae oil soon — that, I think, will result in algae supplanting sequestration as the carbon capture method of choice.

But Oasys could also work well with a thermal solar power plant like the one in Nevada. So where ever you had plenty of sun above a brackish aquifer — and say –400 acres of relatively cheap land–as is available in New Mexico or West Texas — you could put up a solar thermal plant with a Oasys forward osmosis desalination plant because the internal processes are nearly identical–in fact the flash vaporization used by the thermal solar power plant to drive its electrical generators might also take the salt out of solution in the Oasys forward osmosis solution. Actually, Oasys has already talked about something just like this idea.

Here’s a couple more ideas. It may well be that some of the concentrated salts left over from desalination can be used in this hot salt battery or peak production of solar power/wind/coal could be stored as methane with a bacteria that produces it directly from water and carbon dioxide. Here’s the first paper I’ve seen which discusses how the properties of Na+ and Cl- ion in saltwater could be used to create hydrogen.

There are some cost savings there that might justify the costs of tapping deep brackish aquifers in New Mexico that are currently experiencing a big gold rush.

Finally before I take the long view, I believe that I would be remiss if I didn’t mention my favorite energy and desalting ideas. My favorite energy idea: Its my favorite because I thought of it myself. Ha! Here goes. Here is a high school teacher dropping a lump of pure sodium into a bucket of water. Notice the nice big bang? Here’s a bit calmer explanation. How much energy would it take to convert sodium in solution Na+ to pure sodium Na. Then could you harness profitably the exothermic reaction that results from adding pure sodium to water? Beats me. But sheesh it would be way cool to convert salt water economically into power as well as energy. I mention a wild strategy for converting Na+ to Na here. I’m sure there are many more.

Ok now for my favorite desalting research idea. I first mentioned it here. As I’ve said many times, the chief end of seawater desalination R&D should be a a pipe with a semipermiable membrane on the end. The membrane should be so efficient that the water pressure at 100-300 feet of ocean water is sufficient to drive fresh water through the membrane–while the coastal current carries off the concentrate. Ideally you would have slant drilled from the coast. “Slant well” — means you drill down 200-400 feet or so and then drill sidways and up out into the ocean- +-1000 feet–depending on how steep the drop off –so the up sloping drill hole meets the down sloping ocean bed — at the point where the drill emerges from the ocean bed at 100-300 feet of water. A ship floats over the drill and drops in a passive desalter that looks like an underwater mushroom. The mushroom desalter synches with the drill head just like it would if it were an oil well. Fresh water flows through the membraned mushroom downhill to shore. The oil drilling industry already has the ships, the underwater installation and drilling technology. City of Carpinteria near Santa Barbara in California is negotiating with Venoco over their proposed Paredon Project. Venoco wants to drill down a mile or so and then drill sideways a couple more miles out into the Santa Barbara Channel for oil. A helpful provision for their contract would be a slant well for water purposes. The membranes and mushroom to make this work are not available now. But they will be in two or three years. The job for now would be to drill the well and cap it, spend two years designing the mushroom and the membranes for installation in 2011-12. Funding for the experiment could come from several different players including Venoco, the DOI, EPA & DOE. The design for the underwater mushroom would go the the firms that supply underwater oil equipment for Venoco working in conjunction with some American membrane plant designer.

Ok now for the view from eight miles high.

As I mentioned at the MSSC conference in January — everyone knows about great works of the water guys in the early 20th century. Everyone has seen the discovery channel pictures of salt water on Mars–so its not too tough to figure what will be the work of water men in the 22nd century–(or earlier if the rate of change keeps accelerating.) What’s hard to figure is the big plan for the 21st century–on the scale that dam building was for the 20th century–or desalination on Mars. The reason for this is that on the one hand we have legacy ideology from the 1960’s that holds that there are too many people, growth is bad, but it won’t matter anyway because the oceans are rising and they will drown the coastal cities. On the other hand, because of fast tracking technolgical change–perhaps more powerful than that in the early 20th century –there is a rebirth of early 20th century thinking that holds there is plenty of room for more people, growth is good and the way you enable more room for more people is to bring water and power to waterless and powerless places. Take southern california. Whether you believe rising sea levels will drown the coastal cities or whether you believe that future growth is inland over the coastal mountains to the deserts–the answer to providing water and power for the future is the same–because people will either be pushed inland by rising sea levels or pulled inland by new water and power resources. That is, prudent water managers have to either plan for disaster by providing water and energy for the day the population has to move inland to escape rising sea levels OR prudent managers will have to believe there is a better brighter future ahead and plan for it as Hoover did. Actually Herbert Hoover’s thinking involved both propositions above. He wanted to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. The genesis for the colorado river project and the hoover dam was the terrible flooding of the Colorado that just wiped whole communities in the early 20th century. When Hoover wrote the initial enabling legislation in 1922 for the Hoover dam, a lot of the technology to build the dam and create the hydropower had not been invented. We are in the midst of just such a period of extraordinary scientific and technological development. A good thing too though the problem this time is not floods but drought.

Regular readers of this blog know that while I advocate all kinds of desalination techniques–I believe the big water solution for the 21 century comes from the ocean. Therefor the goal of water desalination R&D should be to collapse the cost of desalination and transport so that water delivered from the gulf of Mexico to New Mexico or water delivered from the pacific to arizona or utah –even desalted water delivered over the cascades to eastern Oregon and Washington–is cheap enough for agricultural uses that is < than 100@acre foot. Instead of 100 million dollar desalination plants there should be just a 4 million dollar pipe you stick in the ocean. Water flows downhill to shore by way of slant well drilling. Cheap to manufacture and maintain pipelines with minimum energy pipe the water inland. What energy is needed is drawn from the sun/wind/heat or the water itself. The goal is to turn the deserts green, and increase the potential habitable size of the USA by 1/3. The USA having then created the technology could export it to the rest of the world profitably and double the size of habitable planet. Anyone who follows — not just the research–but the development of new research tools — knows that this is what’s implied by the work in the labs.

In January, 2008 I mentioned that all the candidates both Republican and Democratic mentioned the need for energy independence. The republicans, especially, made the comparison between the the call for energy independence today and the race to moon in the 1960’s and the Manhattan project in the 1940’s.

According to this article dated 3/8/09 the Obama administration takes a similiar tack.

Now energy experts and officials in the Obama administration see a similar “Sputnik moment,” urgent and global in scope, over energy use and climate change. And they want to try some new ventures, similar to efforts in the Cold War, to stimulate technological advances in energy and shift the economy away from oil and coal.

Deep in the $787 billion stimulus bill that became law two weeks ago is $400 million to launch ARPA-E, the Advanced Research Projects Authority for Energy. It’s modeled after the Pentagon’s DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which took on Soviet technology and gave us online shopping in the process.

Needless to say, typically, it takes water to make energy and you need energy to make clean water.

The week of Jan 12-16 I went from a four day Internet marketing conference Sunday-Wednesday to the MSSC Conference Thursday-Friday. As a result, I went to the latter conference with my biz hat on. So I asked the hard funding questions.

The panelists on day one at the MSSC– asked the audience for a raise of hands for those who sent water projects to their congressmen in response to solicitations. About half the crowd raised their hands. The congressional lobbyist said they would not see their projects funded. They were in the presence of a bait and switch.

However, it also became clear that funds would be available for desalination projects if they were pitched and structured properly. For example, if a desal plant wanted its energy source to be from solar or wind or thermal–it could get funding from the DOE for funding to build a renewable energy project. Further, there is provision for about 2.5 billion for efficient utility projects. So a desal plant which could demonstrate that it was more efficiently desalting — might get funding from this second pot. Finally, salt disposal: if structured as a solar pond or a heat capture project or an algae to oil project — might get more funding from the DOE.

Electric power generated in remote locations could have power lines to the grid paid for under the electrical grid legislation. Nothing on this was mentioned but I’ll bet water pipelines might be funded too. (No guarantee here. Certainly the DOE would not fund pipelines.)

In short, whole desal projects could be nearly fully funded if structured properly.

Finally, there is a very good chance that in a couple months there may be 2.5 billion or so federal dollars available for algae to oil producers.

There was problem here. The DOE has had a huge pot of funds since last year for alternative energy spending that no one has tapped into. It doesn’t appear as if county or town or small city official have the skills to get funding from the feds for alternative energy projects. As stated at the conference, there’s just no efficient way to get money from the feds to a local level. While last years DOE funding for alternative energy projects was not mission critical. This year the situation is different. Private funding for alternative energy projects is drying up. According to the NY Times we are entering Dark Days for Green Energy If Green Energy is little understood–the relationship between Green Energy and water production is even less so.(The exception here is hydro electric plants–like the Hoover Dam. Water power projects like the TVA and the Hoover Dam were symbols of the New Deal –but not much further hydro electric work is expected this time.)

I’ve been buried for the last several weeks by work accumulated by the internet marketing conference I attended before the I stopped in at the NSSC Summit. But I did some checking around to see if any of the people I know in Washington interceded for local districts to obtain funding for small time water power projects. I didn’t get any response to speak of. This doesn’t mean that 1000’s of small town projects are not up for funding. Rather it means that water people are generally not in line. Or they’re in the wrong line.

Part of the problem is one of conception. On the second day of the conference, a guy from an electric utility stood up and said that in the future — when a water conference is held that highlights the relationship between water and power–he would prefer not to feel like a guy who had just snuck in incognito.

This is not the way it should be. Water power projects should be at the heart of the new economy and the economic stimulus plan. What projects would they be? Well, anyone who has read my blog for year or so–knows that I favor technology that has not been invented yet. I’m speaking of membranes that are so efficient that they pass fresh water at room temperature and pressure. These are five years away. I also favor pipelines that are cheap to build, long lasting, easy to repair and energy efficient. These are ten years away.

What can be done now with federal funding — is something completely different.

Federal funding for current shovel ready technology would be for solar or wind or thermal powered desalination plants that produced at least double the electricity needed by the desal plant so as to provide for the grid and to power a desalination plant. They would be sited near small towns short on water that sat above brackish aquifers or coastal towns. In places where there were already desalination plants like the El Paso desalination plant or plants in planning like the Poseidon facility in Carlsbad, Calif., near San Diego– they would just need solar power plants for the desalination. They could also get funding for thermal power generation.

But there are other kinds of smaller scale water power projects. For example all over the west– there are oil wells that produce both water and oil/gas. If the water were cleaned up–it would provide a great source of clean fresh water for the locals. (This would also be the case on Indian reservations if they have any gas/oil wells that also produce water.)

There’s more. Every small town has a sewage treatment plant. That water could be funded for algae to oil projects. That’s just the start. There is now technology available to convert sewage to oil. The process that convert raw sewage to oil leave water that is fairly clean. These project would likely be eligible for DOE funding as they represent renewable energy with water as a byproduct.

And more. Every coal plant in the US is a candidate for algae/oil and thermal energy project. First the waste heat from the water would be harvested and then the water would be run through algae for oil generation. By the time water was restored to its original place — much of its original character would be restored too and the CO2 would be scrubbed. This would go a long way toward resolving water intake and CO2 issues with coal plants along the coast of California. As well, coal powered electric plants along the Ohio River and elsewhere could see water returned to the river in nearly its natural state.

Finally it bears mentioning that federal funding might be obtained for the slant well drilling project in the Santa Barbara channel.

When you compare many of the projects that are up for funding to water power projects–there’s just no comparison. Water power projects are the real deal.

Are there shops with the skills to write alternative energy/desal water power specs — who can also write successful federal funding proposals? If you know anyone who who can do that–drop me at line cakilmer AT yahoo DOT com. I’ll post an notice for them on this site. This would match up with any locals interested getting federal funding for an alternative energy powered water desalination plant or water power alternative energy project. A considerable number of people interested in desal & alternative energy pass through this web site daily. So there’s likely to be some synergy.

I attended this conference back in March. The press release for the proposal came out several weeks ago. But I’ve sat on the PR because I’ve wanted to give the matter more thought.

A comment voiced by Americans at the workshop was that the US desalination research community is aware that current research strongly suggests that +-5 years from now the cost of desalination will drop dramtically. However, the US desalination industry –as of March– is not generally aware of what’s happening in basic research.

For this reason, I think it would be better if US funding for this project came from private rather than public sources. (There is a caveat which I mention below.) One candidate would be a US company that is positioned to impliment desalination research discoveries on a large scale. For the US that company would be GE.

Perhaps the man to approach to fund the basic research here is Philip M. Rolchigo.

Consider this bio from the WaterReUse Association Web Site

Philip M. Rolchigo, Ph. D. of GE Water was elected to the WateReuse Foundation Board of Directors during a May 16 Board meeting in Phoenix, AZ. Dr. Rolchigo has worked in research and development since 1988 and now serves as Water Technologies’ Business Program Manager in GE’s Global Research Center. Wade Miller, Executive Director of the Foundation, noted that “Dr. Rolchigo will bring a couple of important dimensions to the Foundation Board. First, GE’s Global Research Center is out on the ‘cutting edge’ of advanced treatment technologies; this knowledge will help the Board to fund projects that are truly ‘value added propositions.’ Second, Dr. Rolchigo has been involved with the Joint Water Reuse & Desalination Task Force (JWR&DTF) activities over the past two years and therefore understands what the Foundation and the Task Force are trying to achieve in desalination. We look forward to having Phil serve on the Board.”

UPDATE:

There is a caveat that I would make to this: That is, if water desalination were moved from the business level to the political level. For example, there would, imho, be a political benefit to a joint statement made by the US President and the Prime Minister of Israel to the effect that the two countries planned to work together collapse the cost of water desalination by a factor of 10 in the next 10 years–and thereby make it economically possible to turn the world’s deserts green — and double the size of the habitable planet.

I think that this would have the same effect as Reagan’s Star Wars Speech. That speech changed the future because it changed the bad guy’s expectations about the future.

Former Prime Minister Shimon Peres has been actively pushing for Israel to get involved with nanotechology as a way to reduce costs for things such as desalination. Senator Domenici of New Mexico has been championing desalination research in the USA. But neither the Kadima Party or the Republican Party leadership currently recognize the profound impact on world affairs that cheap desalinised water would have–and how close that reality is. Someone might want to get leadership up to speed on this.

- 1 -

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Bob Rosenbaum

INNI, Israel

+972 54-473-8040

bob.rosenbaum@nanoisrael.org

David Hamman

WaterCAMPWS, U.S.

+1 217-244-8274

dhamman@uiuc.edu

Researchers in Israel and U.S. Select Top Four Nanotech Projects

for Water Purification

Collaborative effort targets most promising areas for water treatment

using nanotechnologies.

TEL AVIV, Israel – 10 July 2006 – Water researchers from leading institutions in Israel and the U.S. have targeted four cutting-edge projects for collaborative research between the two countries.

Their selection is one outcome of a bi-national workshop held in Washington DC in mid-March, organized by the U.S. and Israeli national nanotechnology initiatives, and theCenter of Advanced Materials for Purification of Water with Systems (WaterCAMPWS) at the University of Illinois.

Prof. Rafi Semiat, Director of the Grand Water Research Institute at the Technion Israel Institute of Technology and a workshop organizer, said that while the group will promote all 12 nanotech-based projects that were outlined at the workshop, special focus is being given to four projects that can provide extraordinary benefits for water purification, and that have the potential to be applied commercially within the next five years.

“Both countries see the target projects not only as very exciting, potential breakthroughs, but also as applied research that can get funded and get commercialized quickly,”

Semiat said.

The target projects focus on distinct nanotechnology-based solutions that were outlined at the bi-national workshop: membranes and membrane processes, biofouling and disinfection, contaminants removal, and environmental monitoring and sensors.

The four targeted projects are:

Development of new, porous polymer-based ultra-filtration membranes with special coatings, that exhibit higher flux and higher resistance to contamination as well as robust molecular sieving abilities. The project will create and test selfassembling membranes with very stable transport channels that reduce biofouling and may also be capable of self-cleaning.

Development of coatings with antimicrobial capabilities that can minimize biological attachment and biofilm formation that can be applied to current Researchers in Israel and US Select Top Four Nanotech Projects for Water Purification generation membranes that are used for drinking water, wastewater and desalination.

Study of mixed metal oxide nanostructured materials for the destruction of biological toxins in surface water and groundwater, using photocatalysis and oxidation. The project will provide data for optimizing the use of these materials in various environments.

Development of whole-cell microbial biosensors to detect minute metabolite excretions from newly-forming biofilms. The project will examine the mechanisms of biological attachment to surfaces, identify its biochemical signals, and develop nanoscale sensors that can be applied to membrane surfaces, enabling optimized maintenance for water purification membranes and significant extension of membrane lifetimes.

Rich Sustich, Industrial and Governmental Development Manager for the WaterCAMPWS and a workshop organizer, said that there is special excitement over the proposed biosensor project, which may result in new tools and methods for water systems operation and reduction of long-term maintenance costs.

“Today’s water infrastructure is run on a one-size-fits-all concept.” Sustich noted. “Systems are assembled from standard components, and maintenance relies more on manufacturer’s recommendations than on a direct understanding of what’s really happening during treatment. This works, but it’s very wasteful.”

Adding biosensing devices throughout the water treatment system will provide direct awareness and interaction with the system in real time. The proposed biosensors can eventually lead beyond passive sensing to the development of ‘smart’ membranes that react biologically to changes in the system’s environment, and perhaps even prevent biofilm and toxics formation without the need for manual intervention.

These treatment concepts mimic those already used successfully in medicine: developing biological-based sensors that can distinguish between healthy and unhealthy cells and enable drug delivery only to the unhealthy cells.

Workshop participants agreed that such biosensing mechanisms could be applied within 5 to 10 years, given the needed development resources. All of the March workshop’s target projects use nanotechnology to move water treatment from today’s broad ’shotgun’ approach to more focused and discrete treatments. “We’re developing water systems that are capable of identifying and addressing contaminants at the molecular level,” Sustich said. “The things that are not toxic and don’t need to be removed won’t be removed. Smart systems that remove only the harmful contaminants will be much more efficient and sustainable.”

Water purification is among the most challenging health, social and technological issues facing the world today. Israel and the U.S., acknowledged leaders in water treatment and water systems management, are seeking to find collaborative ways to use evolving nanotechnology research as platforms for new water treatment solutions, and to help reduce the costs of maintaining water and wastewater infrastructures.

This first joint workshop hosted nearly 50 participants, among them 20 leading water researchers (equally representing Israel and the U.S.) from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sandia National Laboratories, Technion Israel Institute, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), Yale University, and other institutions.

Among the attendees at the workshop were Dr. Mike Roco, Senior Advisor for Nanotechnology at the NSF, Dr. Celia Merzbacher, Assistant Director for Technology at the U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Rafael Harpaz, Minister counselor of Public Affairs at the Israeli Embassy in Washington DC.

Workshop sponsors are seeking approximately $600,000 to support costs of binational collaboration on all 12 projects, with funding to be matched equally between Israeli and U.S. sources. Additional workshops are also planned.

Technical information and funding details on all projects are available upon request.

– ### –

About the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI)

The National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) is a federal U.S. R&D program established to coordinate the multi-agency efforts in nanoscale science, engineering, and technology. The NNI is managed within the framework of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), a Presidential Cabinet-level council by which the President coordinates science, space, and technology policies across the Federal Government. Twenty-three federal U.S. agencies participate in the Initiative, including the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). More information can be found at: http://www.nano.gov/

About the Israel National Nanotechnology Initiative (INNI)

The INNI is a shared initiative of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities and Israel’s Ministry of Trade and Industry and responsible for setting national goals and priorities for advancing nanotechnology in Israel. A key task of the INNI is to promote fruitful collaboration between Israeli and global nanotechnology stakeholders, particularly for projects that lead to continuing success in academia and industry. Promoting Israeli nanotechnologies for used in water purification is a primary goal for the INNI. More information can be found at: http://www.nanoisrael.org/

About the UIUC WaterCAMPWS

The Center for Advanced Materials for the Purification of Water with Systems (WaterCAMPWS) is a science and technology center of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) located at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

The WaterCAMPWS brings together the knowledge and experience of water researchers from ten leading universities and institutions from around the U.S. Its primary mission is to develop revolutionary new materials and systems for safely and

economically purifying water for human use, while simultaneously developing the diverse human resources needed to exploit the research advances and the knowledge base created. More information can be found at:

http://www.watercampws.uiuc.edu/

The article below doesn’t mention the applicability of Nano Lubes to current generation semi permiable membranes–but the thought does cross one’s mind that since Nano Lubes reduce friction on the nanoscale up to 100 times with tiny electrical vibrations …. to keep parts from wearing out — perhaps Nano Lubes might use less electricity than current generation pumps used to force salt water through semi permiable membranes; ie rather than force the water through the membrane– you give the membrane a jolt of electricity and the water slips through at room temperature and pressure. Curiously, electricity has been used recently to create super catlysts by a process called electro-flocculation for desalination purposes in Israel. Scientists there say the process reduces treatment costs by up to 33%. Electro-flocculation involves a very different process that clumps together particulates — but it does go to show a bit more about what electricity can do–and what the savings might be. See what electricity might do for current generation semi permiable membranes below. (Click here to see the article at MIT Technolgy Review)

Nano Lube Could Make Possible Ultra-Dense Memory A new way to reduce friction at the nanoscale could enable the commercialization of nano mechanical devices, including ones for data storage. By Kevin Bullis This figure shows the dramatic reduction in friction that occurs when an atomic force microscope tip is vibrated as it moves across a surface. Reducing friction could help create very dense memory devices. (Courtesy of Anisoara Socoliuc, University of Basel.) Researchers have helped to smooth the way for memory chips that are 10 to 100 times denser than today’s devices, by developing a way to cut down on friction at the nanoscale. The method could have far-reaching implications for both micro- and nano-electromechanical systems (MEMS and NEMS), which are used for storage and other applications in communications and computing. Liquid lubricants do not work at the nano scale; as a result, tiny mechanical devices can wear out too fast to be practical. Now physicists at the University of Basel in Switzerland have developed a dry “lubrication” method that uses tiny vibrations to keep parts from wearing out. The method, described in the current issue of Science, could be particularly useful for a new class of memory devices, pioneered by IBM with its Millipede technology, which uses thousands of atomic force microscope tips to physically “write” bits to a surface by making divots in a polymer substrate and later reading them. The “nano lube” could also find uses with tiny rotating mirrors that might serve as optical routers in communications and mechanical switches, replacing transistors in computer processors, so cutting power consumption. Devices based on NEMS and MEMS are some of the most promising new nanotechnologies. Yet the commercialization of applications such as Millipede — which could store well over 25 DVDs in an area the size of a postage stamp — has been held up in part by wear caused by friction. Indeed, friction is a particular problem in micro- or nanodevices, where contacts between surfaces are tiny points that can do a lot of damage. “Coming down to nanoscale devices, this contact area gets smaller and smaller, so you have less surface where you can dissipate heat,” says Anisoara Socoliuc, a physicist at the University of Basel and co-author of the Science article. “This leads to wear. It’s very easy to break or damage the material at this small scale.” In their experiments, the Swiss researchers moved an atomic force microscope tip made of silicon across a test material of sodium chloride or potassium bromide. Ordinarily, the ultra-sharp tip would travel in a “stick-and-slip” fashion, as friction repeatedly builds up until the tip suddenly breaks free. (The same physical mechanism accounts for squeaky door hinges.) The researchers solved the sticky-tip problem by oscillating the tips using changing voltages. The vibrations, which are so small that the tip stays in continuous contact with the material, keep energy from building up and being suddenly released. As a result, friction decreases 100-fold. Several other nano “lubrication” methods have been tried, including slowing down the movement of mechanical parts to a crawl; but these have been impractical — many devices, for example, need to move at relatively high speeds. In an earlier study, the authors of the current work also showed that carefully decreasing the amount of pressure between two surfaces could decrease friction; but this proved difficult to control. The new method, which promises to be much more practical, solves a key part of the wear problems that reduces the reliability of Millipede-type memory chips, says Georgia Tech mechanical engineering professor William King, who worked on IBM’s Millipede system and is now scientific advisor for a startup company, Nanochip, in Freemont, CA, that’s developing a similar memory based on MEMS and arrays of atomic force microscopy tips. King notes, however, that wear from other mechanisms, such as chemical changes in the material over time, is still a problem. Robert Garpick, professor of engineering physics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, notes that further research needs to be done before this method can be used in actual MEMS and NEMS, but that it’s an important study. “What devices could this enable? It’s up to the imagination, ultimately. A lot remains to be done, but it really is a remarkable result,” he says. Copyright Technology Review 2006.

Scientists at Argonne National Labs are modeling for electrical properties by adding defects in carbon nanotubes. The researchers are interested in improving the materials for thermoelectric power generation. However, this methodology looks like it could be readily adopted for desal research by adjusting the charge on a carbon nanotube to screen for Na or Cl–as was done for Hydrogen production purposes by collaborating researchers from UT and the Research Triangle Institute in the Research Triangle NC. (The UT/NC researchers were not working with carbon nanotubes.)

The Argonne modeling methodology for impurities below looks so thorough that–in lieu of a formalized national labs interlibrary borrowing system for models–off–the shelf… it might be an appropriate and helpful time saver for researchers at San Dia to arrange to borrow/barter/rent/buy the model below.
Published July 05, 2006

bV = parseInt(navigator.appVersion); if (bV >= 4) window.print();

Carbon nanotube building blocks open up possibilities for advanced electronics

Nanotube designs include (from top) “bumpy,” “zipper” and “multiple zipper.” A new method to systematically modify the structure of single-walled carbon nanotubes could expand their electronic properties and open the path to nano-electronics.

Carbon cylinders a few billionths of a meter in diameter and a few microns long, these nanotubes are one of the strongest structures known and have unique electrical and thermal properties. This promising method to add defects to carbon nanotube walls was developed by researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory, who are interested in improving the materials for thermoelectric power generation, the use of heat differences to generate electricity. Thermoelectric conversion is the principle behind thermocouples, thermal diodes and solid-state refrigerators. “If you change the electronic structure,” said Argonne chemist Larry Curtiss, “by adding defects in an ordered way, theoretically you can make more efficient thermoelectric materials. So we could produce electricity more efficiently from solar, nuclear or any thermal power generation.” Curtiss is group leader of the Molecular Materials Group in Argonne’s Materials Science Division. One dimer at a time Creating defects by adding molecules to nanotubes is challenging because of their extremely small size. And researchers are seeking a controlled, reproducible method. So the Argonne team, which includes Curtiss, Michael Sternberg, Peter Zapol, Dieter Gruen, Gary Kedziora, Paul Redfern and David Horner, used computer simulation tools to learn how to add a single carbon dimer – a molecule of two bonded carbons – to a single-walled carbon nanotube. The single-walled nanotubes – believed to be the best candidates for next step of miniaturizing modern electronics – resemble a long tube of chain-link fence made of hexagons. The Argonne team simulated a variety of approaches to attach the carbon dimer to the nanotube. They found the easiest and strongest method is by horizontally inserting a carbon dimer into two hexagonal bonds, creating two adjacent pentagons and heptagons (seven-sided structures) in the chain link. One dimer, two dimer… After they understood how to add one dimer, the researchers began to add dimers in patterns. “The interesting thing was going into the multiple patterns,” Curtiss said. “We started building up patterns using the dimers like building blocks and adding them to the tubes.” The researchers found a number of interesting modifications: – The “bumpy” tube has carbon dimers added symmetrically around the circumference of the tube to create a stable bulge. – The “zipper” tube has dimers added horizontally along the axial direction to every other hexagon, creating alternating single octagons and pairs of pentagons. – The “multiple zipper” tube has six axial “zippers” spaced by hexagon rows around a tube. “The structures we simulated,” said physicist Zapol, “have new and unexpected features. They modify the electronic properties in the nanotubes, and that will be useful in future electronic applications.” Guided by the simulations, Argonne materials scientists, led by Gruen, with expertise in carbon nanomaterials are creating materials for testing. “But we think that some of these structures exist already,” said Curtiss. Zapol’s literature review revealed that some researchers have found these structures, but they did not know what they were. The zipper structure particularly appeals to Argonne researchers because the atomic spacings in the openings are just the right size to bond nanotubes to Ultrananocrystalline™ diamond and combine the properties of both. Ultrananocrystalline diamond is a novel form of nanocarbon developed by Argonne that has many of the properties of diamond – the hardest known material on earth – and can be deposited on a variety of surfaces. Unlike diamond, its properties can be optimized depending on the application. Researchers plan to use the carbon nanotubes as a scaffolding to attach other molecules and study their functions. They will also connect the tubes into arrays and study the effects. Source: by Evelyn Brown, Argonne National Laboratory

This news is brought to you by PhysOrg.com

Earlier in June Elliot Fang mentioned at a Material Research Conference ““Fifteen years ago, the Cray YMP [supercomputer] was the crown jewel; it’s now equivalent to a PDA we have in our pocket.”

So where wil computers be in five to ten years? According to the Seattle Times:
Monday, June 26, 2006

WASHINGTON — The federal government is pushing computer scientists and engineers to step up the speed and capacity of America’s supercomputers.

Officials say much faster performance is needed to handle a looming tidal wave of scientific, technical and military data.

“Within the next five to 10 years, computers 1,000 times faster than today’s computers will become available. These advances herald a new era in scientific computing,” according to Raymond Orbach, undersecretary for science at the Department of Energy.

Interestingly, the DOE is interested in issues that are very close to those of the desalination community.

The Department of Energy also is offering $70 million in grants for teams of computer scientists and engineers to develop petascale software and data-management tools.

“The scientific problems are there to be solved, and petascale computers are on the horizon,” said Walter Polansky, senior technical adviser in the department’s Office of Advanced Scientific Computing.

For example, the Energy Department wants ultrafast computers to determine the 3-D structure of molecules that let drugs pass through cell walls, knowledge that can be vital against cancer.

This sort of knowledge would be vital to desalination research as well.

For more information online, go to the National Science Foundation program, at www.nsf.gov/pubs/2005/nsf05625/nsf05625.htm, or the Department of Energy program, at www.scidac.org.

Another possible funding resource would be the New Fund created by the Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. According to the Gates Foundation Grand Challenges in Global Health Backgrounder

A panel of international experts has identified 14 major scientific challenges that, if solved, could lead to breakthroughs in improving global health. The challenges include developing vaccines that do not require refrigeration, preventing insects from transmitting disease, and growing healthy crops in harsh climates. To achieve these breakthroughs, the foundation supports the Grand Challenges in Global Health initiative.

Think the Gates Foundation might be interested in funding computer modeling that would lead to cheap/fast/durable desalination membranes & catalysts–that would in turn lead to cheap desalinised water that would help famers growing healthy crops in harsh climates? I do.

Gates Foundation funding might be used to make it simple for desalination researchers without access to the SuperComputers at the National Labs to fund their modeling requirements. Two models for doing this would be 1.) for the scientists to go to the Gates Foundation directly or 2.)for an organization like WaterReuse.org to petition the Gates Foundation for a block grant to cover scientific and admistrative costs for a modeling program that would match scientists with modelers and their supercomputers.

Just a thought.

Often a research organization will have the right questions  but  limited time, budget or brain power with which to solve the problem. Wouldn’t it be nice to say “Ok we have this problem and we will pay this much for a solution. A number of web sites have grown up in the last couple years that bring together Research organizations and problem solvers like InnoCentive, YourEncore, & NineSigma. There’s a lot of seriously interesting ways this can be used to accelerate water desal research. Consider the article below in Wired Magazine.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html?pg=4&topic=crowds&topic_set=

The Rise of Crowdsourcing

By Jeff Howe
3. The Tinkerer

The future of corporate R&D can be found above Kelly’s Auto Body on Shanty Bay Road in Barrie, Ontario. This is where Ed Melcarek, 57, keeps his “weekend crash pad,” a one-bedroom apartment littered with amplifiers, a guitar, electrical transducers, two desktop computers, a trumpet, half of a pontoon boat, and enough electric gizmos to stock a RadioShack. On most Saturdays, Melcarek comes in, pours himself a St. Remy, lights a Player cigarette, and attacks problems that have stumped some of the best corporate scientists at Fortune 100 companies.

Not everyone in the crowd wants to make silly videos. Some have the kind of scientific talent and expertise that corporate America is now finding a way to tap. In the process, forward-thinking companies are changing the face of R&D. Exit the white lab coats; enter Melcarek – one of over 90,000 “solvers” who make up the network of scientists on InnoCentive, the research world’s version of iStockphoto.

Pharmaceutical maker Eli Lilly funded InnoCentive’s launch in 2001 as a way to connect with brainpower outside the company – people who could help develop drugs and speed them to market. From the outset, InnoCentive threw open the doors to other firms eager to access the network’s trove of ad hoc experts. Companies like Boeing, DuPont, and Procter & Gamble now post their most ornery scientific problems on InnoCentive’s Web site; anyone on InnoCentive’s network can take a shot at cracking them.

The companies – or seekers, in InnoCentive parlance – pay solvers anywhere from $10,000 to $100,000 per solution. (They also pay InnoCentive a fee to participate.) Jill Panetta, InnoCentive’s chief scientific officer, says more than 30 percent of the problems posted on the site have been cracked, “which is 30 percent more than would have been solved using a traditional, in-house approach.”

The solvers are not who you might expect. Many are hobbyists working from their proverbial garage, like the University of Dallas undergrad who came up with a chemical to use inart restoration, or the Cary, North Carolina, patent lawyer who devised a novel way to mix large batches of chemical compounds.

This shouldn’t be surprising, notes Karim Lakhani, a lecturer in technology and innovation at MIT, who has studied InnoCentive. “The strength of a network like InnoCentive’s is exactly the diversity of intellectual background,” he says. Lakhani and his three coauthors surveyed 166 problems posted to InnoCentive from 26 different firms. “We actually found the odds of a solver’s success increased in fields in which they had no formal expertise,” Lakhani says. He has put his finger on a central tenet of network theory, what pioneering sociologist Mark Granovetter describes as “the strength of weak ties.” The most efficient networks are those that link to the broadest range of information, knowledge, and experience.

Which helps explain how Melcarek solved a problem that stumped the in-house researchers at Colgate-Palmolive. The giant packaged goods company needed a way to inject fluoride powder into a toothpaste tube without it dispersing into the surrounding air. Melcarek knew he had a solution by the time he’d finished reading the challenge: Impart an electric charge to the powder while grounding the tube. The positively charged fluoride particles would be attracted to the tube without any significant dispersion.

“It was really a very simple solution,” says Melcarek. Why hadn’t Colgate thought of it? “They’re probably test tube guys without any training in physics.” Melcarek earned $25,000 for his efforts. Paying Colgate-Palmolive’s R&D staff to produce the same solution could have cost several times that amount – if they even solved it at all. Melcarek says he was elated to win. “These are rocket-science challenges,” he says. “It really reinforced my confidence in what I can do.”

Melcarek, who favors thick sweaters and a floppy fishing hat, has charted an unconventional course through the sciences. He spent four years earning his master’s degree at the world-class particle accelerator in Vancouver, British Columbia, but decided against pursuing a PhD. “I had an offer from the private sector,” he says, then pauses. “I really needed the money.” A succession of “unsatisfying” engineering jobs followed, none of which fully exploited Melcarek’s scientific training or his need to tinker. “I’m not at my best in a 9-to-5 environment,” he says. Working sporadically, he has designed products like heating vents and industrial spray-painting robots. Not every quick and curious intellect can land a plum research post at a university or privately funded lab. Some must make HVAC systems.

For Melcarek, InnoCentive has been a ticket out of this scientific backwater. For the past three years, he has logged onto the network’s Web site a few times a week to look at new problems, called challenges. They are categorized as either chemistry or biology problems. Melcarek has formal training in neither discipline, but he quickly realized this didn’t hinder him when it came to chemistry. “I saw that a lot of the chemistry challenges could be solved using electromechanical processes I was familiar with from particle physics,” he says. “If I don’t know what to do after 30 minutes of brainstorming, I give up.” Besides the fluoride injection challenge, Melcarek also successfully came up with a method for purifying silicone-based solvents. That challenge paid $10,000. Other Melcarek solutions have been close runners-up, and he currently has two more up for consideration. “Not bad for a few weeks’ work,” he says with a chuckle.

It’s also not a bad deal for the companies that can turn to the crowd to help curb the rising cost of corporate research. “Everyone I talk to is facing a similar issue in regards to R&D,” says Larry Huston, Procter & Gamble’s vice president of innovation and knowledge. “Every year research budgets increase at a faster rate than sales. The current R&D model is broken.”

Huston has presided over a remarkable about-face at P&G, a company whose corporate culture was once so insular it became known as “the Kremlin on the Ohio.” By 2000, the company’s research costs were climbing, while sales remained flat. The stock price fell by more than half, and Huston led an effort to reinvent the way the company came up with new products. Rather than cut P&G’s sizable in-house R&D department (which currently employs 9,000 people), he decided to change the way they worked.

Seeing that the company’s most successful products were a result of collaboration between different divisions, Huston figured that even more cross-pollination would be a good thing. Meanwhile, P&G had set a goal of increasing the number of innovations acquired from outside its walls from 15 percent to 50 percent. Six years later, critical components of more than 35 percent of the company’s initiatives were generated outside P&G. As a result, Huston says, R&D productivity is up 60 percent, and the stock has returned to five-year highs. “It has changed how we define the organ-ization,” he says. “We have 9,000 people on our R&D staff and up to 1.5 million researchers working through our external networks. The line between the two is hard to draw.”P&G is one of InnoCentive’s earliest and best customers, but the company works with other crowdsourcing networks as well. YourEncore, for example, allows companies to find and hire retired scientists for one-off assignments. NineSigma is an online marketplace for innovations, matching seeker companies with solvers in a marketplace similar to InnoCentive. “People mistake this for outsourcing, which it most definitely is not,” Huston says. “Outsourcing is when I hire someone to perform a service and they do it and that’s the end of the relationship. That’s not much different from the way employment has worked throughout the ages. We’re talking about bringing people in from outside and involving them in this broadly creative, collaborative process. That’s a whole new paradigm.”