Vol.4 No.3 2012

29/62

Research paper : A novel technology for production of drinking water in emergencies (A. Sonoda)−161−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.4 No.3 (2012) Discussions with Reviewers1 Setting of the product specsQuestion (Norimitsu Murayama, Advanced Manufacturing Research Institute, AIST)Your indication of the product specs is very instructive: “The stance of conducting the R&D without leaking the corporate know-how to others by clearly setting the product specification is important in working with companies that have the technological capability”. In this R&D, please tell us which organization took the leadership in setting the product specifications. Also, can you talk about your efforts on the breakdown from product spec setting to goal setting of the elemental technologies?Answer (Akinari Sonoda)As written in the Acknowledgement, the product specs were set under the leadership of Principal Researcher Hirotsu (currently Deputy Director) who was the research representative. As written in “2. Objective of the R&D”, in setting the product specs, we set the goal that would allow us to win the competition against the current product, and the breakdown into elemental technologies started from there. Particularly, the aim at SV=20 was set for the flow rate, and we jumped into the experiment without certainties. As a result, although the treatment volume per column volume decreased, we were able to produce drinking water that fulfilled the tap water standards.2 Reason the product was not realizedQuestion (Akira Kageyama, Innovation Promotion Headquarter, AIST)This paper presents the development of the nitrate ion selective adsorbent “material” to supply drinking water in times of emergency, conducted jointly with private companies, and it achieves the technological objective through integrated R&D. On the other hand, the company made the final decision of halting the product realization of the water purification system. The reasons include the cost compared to the competing technology and the market size estimation (or projection) as well as the technological objective. Does that mean that the goal setting was too loose? Answer (Akinari Sonoda)One of the reasons was, as mentioned in “4. Merit of the consortium and the remaining issues for commercialization”, we did not do the simultaneous development of real time monitoring technology, and the user could not determine the pros and cons of using this system.In the initial goal setting, we conducted the R&D and prototype fabrication by setting our objective as creating a product that was distinctly different from the current RO system. However, looking back at the end of R&D, not only were the objective values insufficient, but also 1) market size projection, 2) cost setting, and 3) consideration of the market development were not sufficient in terms of differentiation against the existing technology. That means the goal setting was, as a result, not sufficient.While the above comment includes my inferences, in the R&D with the objective of product realization, it is important to review these points and plan ahead with the cooperation of the partner company.3 Continuation of the technologyQuestion (Norimitsu Murayama)I think your comment “the technology resides in people, and the continuation of technology is the responsibility of the organization” is an extremely important issue. Can you tell us your specific ideas or comments on the continuity of technology?Answer (Akinari Sonoda)I think the continuity of the technology is difficult in AIST, because the institutes undergo reorganizations and terminations where the name of the institute is obliterated each time. Of course, it is not possible to pass on all the technologies, and perhaps certain technologies must be selected. For example, the technology that will be replaced by new technology and will never be used in the future may disappear, but the major technology that will be the main stream should be passed on by forming a group that includes all generations (age groups). The former Agency of Industrial Science Technology wasn’t too bad in terms of continuation of technology, because it employed people to supplement the personnel quota. For the continuation of technology, the ideal is to have groups of five to seven people share common technologies at all times. One idea may be to have a larger category of the groups.

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です