Vol.9 No.3 2017

Research paper : Radioactive cesium decontamination technology for ash (T. Kawamoto et al.)−147−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.9 No.3 (2017) The important point is intellectual property management. In simultaneous collaboration with multiple companies to achieve a mutual goal, it is difcult to manage information while dividing the results into collaboration with each company. To do so, we chose the following policy to manage the knowledge and included it in the joint research agreement: (1) results disclosed to AIST can be disclosed to other joint researchers as necessary; (2) prot of a company that produces an invention will be ensured through patent licensing; and (3) for patents generated through joint research, the percentage of rights will be determined by the degree of contribution to the invention by the parties involved. In addition, even if an invention is patented by a single company, the patent generated via joint research will be licensed to other joint researchers as necessary. The policy means the following.• Contents that a company wishes to use as know-how should not be discussed with AIST.• Contents discussed with AIST will be disclosed to other collaborating companies: a company will be able to use other companies’ technologies to accelerate development.This scheme is effective if one needs to share basic technologies among the companies. In the case of the evaluation method of the adsorbents, it is better to follow this scheme. Many companies collaborating for the adsorbent fabrication had no specialization in radioactive materials evaluation. Although the companies have their own core technology for adsorbent fabrication, the performance evaluation should be done with established and unified methods for appropriate comparison, and should be highly rated. Many companies started the joint research with AIST with the agreement of this scheme.This scheme is expected to be quite effective when development for commercial applications is based on the core technology of public institutes. If a public institute owns the core technology, then a company aiming at practical application must collaborate with the institute. Collaboration with the institute would support future standardization of the technology. It is also important to collaborate with other companies having different core technologies. In this case, our collaboration network included various companies such as an adsorbent manufacturer and plant engineering companies using the adsorbent in their plants, indicating that construction of a supply chain from the material to the plant comes easily. To maintain the scheme, the research institute must have the capacity to manage the supply chain and standardization. This capacity is requested of the research institute in the near future.(4) Utilization of conventional technologyUsing conventional technology to the greatest extent possible is desirable to accelerate research and development. The conventional technology can be expected to provide operational stability, thereby reducing the risks. For this research, we actively used conventional technologies especially those related to incineration technology, ash washing technology, wastewater treatment, and on-site management. For conventional technologies, the companies would have vast knowledge of their business eld. Even if they have insufficient knowledge, knowledge acquisition can be done rather easily from public documents.The most important aspect of technology transfer is how to promote (3) corporate research. The technology should be transferred to companies because an R&D institute cannot accomplish commercialization, and has no knowledge related to commercialization. Construction of the collaboration network is also effective for the company to produce a business plan with a concrete supply chain. The intellectual property should be managed appropriately with appropriate agreement of joint research to encourage understanding of the companies.3.2 Technology management for R&DWhen the strategy for technology transfer is xed, partners and the approach of the technological development are decided mechanically. In the case of “(3) corporate research,” AIST need not introduce the entire technology. For example, for adsorbent fabrication, a company developed the adsorbent fabrication, whereas AIST mainly concentrated on the improvement of the method for evaluating the adsorbent. However, for on-site management of plant engineering, AIST had to provide major support; even though the technology transfer would be done under “(3) corporate research.” This was because our theme was the decontamination of radioactive cesium. Even the national government had not investigated cesium decontamination before the accident. Therefore, the technological development was conducted simultaneously with the organization of various legislation. To adjust to the unusual conditions, we were requested to understand the legal policies appropriately, and were asked for requests from the technology side to the government organizations. Especially, AIST participated in the Fly Ash Washing Technology Workshop, conducted by the National Institute of Environmental Studies, to contribute to the publication of “Technical material on y ash washing technology (Guidelines for performance and design of plants).”[53] The pilot plant tests were conducted in accordance with guidelines to reduce the risk that our technology would not be able to meet legal requests.In the case of (1) patent + technological transfer and (2) technological disclosure, the R&D must be conducted by AIST. To achieve this, AIST set research teams for the project with a Vice-President as the leader, and with various

元のページ  ../index.html#34