Geothermal Landscape study final

Geothermal Energy
Prepared for
Intellectual property
landscape study
Prepared by

2
GEOTHERMAL ENERGY INTELECTUAL POROERTY LANDSCAPE STUDY
Summary by Iceland Geothermal and Arnason Factor
Patent counts and statistics have for a long time been regarded as one of the main indicators of technical
innovation and progress lead by such innovation.
The Icelandic Geothermal Cluster decided last year to conduct a study on the landscape of patents in the
geothermal sector with the purpose to aid and support constructive discussion about the Icelandic geothermal
innovation development.
When looking at the global patent development in general it is evident that it has been growing by numbers for a
considerably long time. Patent filings and grant have actually been growing constantly over a very long period of
time. During different time span this growth have been led by different countries and technology sectors. We have
seen growth in Japan, US, S-Korea and now almost exponential growth in China. In the same way we have seen
similar technology sector growth. Most recently software related. It appears in retrospect that this growth has been
more or less synchronized with these countries economic/tech growth periods. At the moment we see a very
interesting patenting growth in China. A growth rate which has not been seen anywhere ells before. The China
growth is currently between 25-30% annually compared with a 5-6% global growth. Due to the economical size of
China (world second largest economy) such a growth can, if it continues change the fundamentals of the world’s
intellectual property landscape and if the economic theories about the link between patents and economic growth
holds this could also change the world’s economic landscape.

3
Having said that we in Iceland pride our self of our intellectual and economic prosperity and capabilities. Our
economy has been growing steadily apart from some regular bumps. We have in many views a platform and an
outlook that at least in relative terms almost everyone in the world envy us of.
When discussing our Research and Development activities our focus and debate has very much and
understandably been on the input side, in particular lack of financial support. We have claimed lack of
governmental, industrial and private support. That however have been changing. We have on the other hand not
so much discussed the output side and for that matter we have given almost no attention at all to the
measurement indication that Patents can play.
In attempt to provide a better foundation ground for a productive, solution-aimed and forward thinking discussion
The Icelandic Geothermal Cluster in co-operation with Arnason Faktor Intellectual Property Consulting have
engaged into co-operation to foster such discussion. One, but not the only step in that process was to get an
objective view of the International landscape when it comes to Patent activities in the geothermal sector. In that
purpose and in order to have the best footing possible we engage the international information service provider
Clarivate Analytics’ (previously Thomson Reuters) to conduct an international patent landscape study for the
geothermal sector.

4
information and hopefully clear enough to see what we need to see and what can really help us in supporting, adding and
developing the geothermal sector to become prosperous in the coming years.
In the landscape mapping that is presented here it is possible to see certain trends. Some are more general and others are
more geothermal industry specific. The most important are:
More general trends
• General Patent filings and granting are growing
• There are certain countries that have more patent growth than others (China)
• In general we have experienced considerable growth in patenting in Iceland, though lead by 99% by foreign entities
• We have over the last two decades seen no growth and in fact decline in patent activities by Icelandic entities
Trends in the Geothermal Sector
• There is clear indication of international growth of patents in the geothermal sector
• The geothermal patent growth appears to be led by China
• There appears to be certain trend that corporations active in the “oil exploring” appears to extend their patent claims
into the geothermal sector
• We see indications of growing geothermal patent activity in Iceland by foreign entities
• We have only been able to identify two patent application by Icelanders filed within the geothermal space within the last
two decades (20 years).

5
Having said that, we can also read from the data that in many ways we most likely find us at an early stage of an
IP development in the geothermal sector. We still have almost every option to utilize the opportunities in front of us
and claim or gain our position. However, if we ignore the indications in front of us and do nothing we run the risk
that the play will change.
It is our hope that this study may serve as one supporting factor for further discussion and development of
geothermal IP development.
Reykjavik, 9 February 2018
Renewable Energy Cluster Arnason Faktor

CONTENTS
• Objective and Scope
• Taxonomy
• Summary
• Overview
• Assignee Analysis
• Technology Analysis
• Themescape Map
• EP-Pending Applications -Analysis
• Appendix

7
Taxonomy
Level 1 Level 2 Related Keywords
Well casing Casing Joints, Material, Flanges, Well Design, Packers, Sealant (use sealant with reference to casing) liners, production tubing
Well head Wellhead (X-Mas Tree),Well Head, Well Head Equipment, Well Head Logging, Well Head Control Valves,Well Head Shut In Valves
Well maintenance Casing Inspection, Inspection Tools, Casing Repair Equipment, Well Treatment, Acid Treatment,
Drilling Drilling Methods/Procedures, Directional Tools, Drilling Fluid, Drilling Mud, Drill Bits
Well flow Well Flow Start Up, Well Flow Equipment, Well Shut In Methods, Well Flow Logging Equipment
Well stimulation Well Stimulation Equipment And Method, Diverting Agent,Well Diversion Agent
Well fluid
Corrosion Inhibitor, Scaling Inhibitor, Friction Modifier, Corrosion And Scaling, Supercritical Fluid, Supercritical Water (Scw), Fluid
Handling, Tracers, Fluid Level Indicators, Chemical Treatment Of Injection Fluid, reinjection
Cementing Cementing, Zonal Isolation,
New drilling technologies Plasma-Jet Rock Cutting, High-Energy Laser Beams, Hydraulic And Thermal Fracturing, Hydro Shearing, Fracking
Ultra-deep drilling technologies Ultra-deep drilling technologies
Extraction of Minerals Minerals Production, Geothermal Brine
Separators Vertical/Horizontal, Separator Intakes, Moisture Removers, Demisters, Control Equipment, Solid Material Separation
Silencers Rock Mufflers, Concrete Mufflers, Other Type Of Mufflers
Steam piping/Two phase piping
Over Pressure Devices, Rupture Disc, Pipe Expansion, Over Ground/Underground Piping,Pipe Inspection Tools, Pipe Coatings, Pipe
Cladding, Hot Water Transmission
Steam turbine-generator
Reaction/Impulse/Binary, Erosion/Corrosion Shields In Steam Path, Controls, Emergency Shut Down, Control Valves (for turbines), Blade
Design, Stationary Blading Design, Inspection, Inspection Tools (for turbines only), Compressor System
Valves Steam Line Control Valves, Steam Line, Pressure Relief Valves/Equipment, Master Valve/Side-Tap Valve, Blowout Preventer
Condenser Direct-Contact, Surface-Type, Gas Collection
Pumps
Shallow Or Ground Source Geothermal, Pump Internals, Pump Materials, Geothermal Pumps, Submersible Pumps, Liquid Ring Pump
System
Gas removal system Ejector System, Hybrid System
NCG treatment system Ncg Treating Equipment And Methods
Cooling towers Water Cooled Towers, Air Coolers, Hybrid Towers
Enhanced geothermal system (EGS) Generation Of Geothermal Electricity Without The Need For Natural Convective Hydrothermal Resources.
Sensing and Measuring Systems Down Hole Measurements, Acoustic Sensing Systems, Bore Hole Imaging, Seismic Monitoring, Stress Field, Micro Seismicity
Centralizers Centralizers
Well Drilling, Extraction and
Maintenance
Well bore equipment

8
Summary
PATENTING ACTIVITY TIER I ASSIGNEES TOP INNOVATING COUNTRIES
TOP TECHNOLOGIESASSIGNEE TIER DISTRIBUTIONTECHNOLOGY GRANT SUCCESS

10
Grant Success
• The graphical representation indicates publication trend of patents and a breakup of utility models, applications and granted patents.
• Since 2001, there has been a sharp rise in global filing indicating conducive environment for IP rights protection in this domain.
• Grant success gives a complete picture of innovation than patent volumes alone. When considering this metric, it should be borne in mind that there is
a bias against younger patent portfolios because they may have had insufficient examination time.
• Granted patents constitute ~45% of inventions reflecting a relatively mature field, but still growing with a significant portion of patents still in
prosecution.
Note: Granted means at least one granted patent in a family.
Invention family
status Total inventions
Grants 2595
Applications 2324
Utility model 895
All 5814

11
Grant Success with respect to Country of origin
• The graphical representation alongside indicates
jurisdiction based grant success
• Grant success rates in different countries or patent
jurisdictions vary. In geothermal technology, South
Korea has the highest rate – 73% and China has the
lowest rate – 13%.
• Part of this variation may be due to the age of the
portfolios (China has the “youngest” overall
portfolio), but also varying practices in the different
patent authorities.

12
Geographical Analysis on Source of Invention (1/2)
• The charts alongside indicate country and
regional analysis based on earliest priority
country which is a good predictor of where the
R&D originated.
• Asia Pacific dominates this field with 55% of the
overall patent collection having priority filings
in that region primarily contributed by China,
Japan and South Korea.
• Comparatively far less overall priority filing
activity has occurred in North America (26%)
and Europe (16%).
• Europe’s activity is majorly driven by Germany’s
priority filings.

13
Geographical Analysis on Source of Invention (2/2)
• The chart alongside indicates inventive activity
over the past 20 years across different
jurisdictions and the table indicates volume,
average annual growth rate (AAGR) based on
the priority filings.
• Until 2010, USA was leading the innovation race
in geothermal technology, however, it got
surpassed by China since then. This can be
ascribed to the inventor-friendly IP policies and
infrastructure of China.
• The data further indicates that Japan exhibit
slow but steady growth over the timeframe of
1995 – present in the field of geothermal
energy.
• USA, South Korea and Germany has negative
Average Annual growth rate due to a declining
trend in filings since 2009
Source of innovation Inventions
AAGR (Last 5
Years) Filing trend
China 1721 29.2%
United States 1449 -13.8%
Japan 735 2.2%
South Korea 674 -4.4%
Germany 348 -27.8%

14
Geographical Spread and Protection
• The representation alongside has family member
countries representing geographical reach of the
technical field, i.e., where assignees choose to
expand patent protection beyond the priority filing.
• Enforceable coverage in specific national markets is
essential because the laws of the country where the
technology is used to have legal precedence over
the technology's country of origin, i.e., priority
country. The publication country is a good
indication of the markets in which the patent
holders plan to commercialize the patented
technologies.
• In total, these represent the most likely
commercialization target geographies for this field.
• China, Japan, and the United States appears to be
the preferred markets in this field.
• About 12% of all the patent applications follow PCT
filing route indicating likely intent to file globally.
Countries Priority filings Family filings
% Filed as priority
case
China 1721 2003 85.9%
United States 1449 1759 82.4%
PCT 140 1199 11.7%
Japan 735 882 83.3%
South Korea 674 726 92.8%
EPO 79 671 11.8%
Canada 43 520 8.3%
Germany 348 425 81.9%
Australia 25 376 6.6%
United Kingdom 101 218 46.3%
Mexico 14 208 6.7%
Russia 88 178 49.4%
Norway 24 161 14.9%
Brazil 15 152 9.9%
India 12 131 9.2%
France 79 84 94.0%
New Zealand 9 56 16.1%
Spain 12 53 22.6%
Taiwan 19 52 36.5%
Singapore 0 43 0.0%
Philippines 2 42 4.8%
South Africa 3 42 7.1%
Indonesia 4 40 10.0%
Italy 41 40 102.5%
Netherlands 34 31 100.0%
Austria 30 23 100.0%
Sweden 26 23 113.0%
Israel 0 20 0.0%
Switzerland 16 17 94.1%
Argentina 1 16 6.3%
Czech Republic 8 15 53.3%
Gulf Cooperation Council 0 15 0.0%
Hong Kong 0 13 0.0%
Poland 13 12 108.3%
Romania 12 12 100.0%
Hungary 7 9 77.8%
Malaysia 0 9 0.0%
Belgium 3 8 37.5%
Finland 8 7 114.3%
Vietnam 0 7 0.0%
Turkey 4 6 66.7%
Slovakia 5 4 125.0%
Denmark 2 3 66.7%
Luxembourg 1 2 50.0%
Thailand 0 2 0.0%
Iceland 2 0 NA
Colombia 1 0 NA
Greece 1 0 NA
Latvia 1 0 NA
United Arab Emirates 1 0 NA

15
Quadlateral & Trilateral Analysis
Trilateral Filing: Patent families having protection in the US,
Europe, and Japan
Quadlateral Filing: Patent families having protection in the US,
Europe, Japan, and China
• Another indicator of commercialization intent is the number of patent families filed in Trilateral and Quadlateral
authorities.
Earliest
priority year All inventions Trilateral Quadlateral Rest
95 86 5 3 81
96 61 2 1 59
97 68 2 1 66
98 84 3 2 81
99 72 6 5 66
00 81 6 5 75
01 59 3 2 56
02 103 2 0 101
03 111 8 6 103
04 144 5 4 139
05 180 6 5 174
06 239 12 8 227
07 317 9 8 308
08 340 17 13 323
09 445 10 9 435
10 444 9 5 435
11 516 6 4 510
12 563 16 13 547
13 534 3 3 531
14 494 1 1 493
15 499 0 0 499
16 363 0 0 363

17
Domain Shareholders by Sectors
• The domain shareholder representation indicates the distribution of technology as per the type of assignee and thus it was
categorized into Commercial, Academic and Government, Individual and Collaborations.
• Around 55% of inventions are owned by Commercial assignees showcases an already established market and intent of
commercialization on patents.
• Only 10% of the assignees in this landscape are from the Academic & Government sector, suggesting only a limited amount of
fundamental research and less possibility of development of new, disruptive technologies in this area.
• About 9% (534 inventions) of the inventions are done by Collaborations in which Collaborations between Commercial and
Academic & Government are 105 inventions only, 393 inventions in which Commercial-Commercial collaborations and 36
inventions having a Academic-Academic Collaboration.

18
Domain Shareholders by Portfolio Strength
• The graph alongside represents the distribution
of assignees divided into tiers by volume of
inventions to reveal more information about
the portfolio sizes. The doughnut shows the
breakdown of the overall landscape with
respect to portfolio size while the below table
indicates the number of assignees in each tier
and their cumulative volume.
• Tier 3 players cover approximately 54% of the
landscape, indicating constant development
within the technological space from smaller
players.
• Individual inventors constitute a considerable
chunk of this landscape-26%
• The present tier distribution landscape also
exhibit potential technology transfer
opportunities across mainstream,
medium/small-sized and individual players in
terms of volume in this field.Tier description Tier
Total
inventions Number of assignees Tier 1 95 96 97 98
Tier 1: Assignees with > 30 inventions Tier 1 791 10
Tier 2: Assignees with 15 - 30 inventions Tier 2 436 20
Tier 3: Assignees with < 15 inventions Tier 3 3194 2024
Tier 4: Individuals Tier 4 1531

19
Tier 1 Entities and Timeline
• The above heat maps show the filing activity of Tier 1 entities (filings > 30) over
the past 20 years with the most recent activity. Tier 1 includes 10 Entities.
• Baker Hughes, Halliburton and Schlumberger are the leading innovators in this
technology space.
• Sinopec with a recency of 100% is the late entrant in the market and appears to be
emerging as a leading innovator in this technology sector. Other late entrants are
Daesung and Corona Corp.
• Toshiba has an AAGR of 198% which shows a significant investment in this
technology space over the last five years.
Tier 1 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Total
inventions
% Recency
(inventions filed since
2010) AAGR (Last 5 Years)
Baker Hughes 3 1 6 1 1 1 8 12 20 13 37 21 24 6 7 161 67% 19%
Halliburton 1 3 2 3 1 4 3 5 6 3 4 1 5 3 7 37 33 22 8 151 73% 91%
Schlumberger 2 7 4 9 6 6 7 4 9 5 15 22 10 5 10 9 4 4 2 7 147 18% NA
Mitsubishi 5 7 7 6 3 3 5 5 4 6 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 10 13 6 1 92 36% 149%
Toshiba 1 3 5 1 1 2 2 5 2 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 8 6 6 1 5 60 45% 198%
Fuji Electric 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 5 5 2 5 3 2 39 31% NA
Sinopec 1 2 5 8 12 11 39 100% NA
Kolon Global 5 3 1 1 1 15 7 2 1 36 28% NA
Daesung 2 1 3 2 3 8 8 4 3 34 91% 27%
Corona Corp 3 4 3 1 3 16 2 32 91% 91%

20
Tier 1 - Grant Success
• The table representats the grant success of
various Tier 1 entities and as noted previously,
while considering this metric, it should be
borne in mind that there is a bias against
younger patent portfolios because they may
have had insufficient examination time
• Grant success rate is one indicator of novelty
but may also reflect the IP strategy and
resources that an entity commits to patent
prosecution.
• The higher grant rates of Schlumberger,
Daesung, Baker Hughes indicates high quality of
the research in the geothermal energy
technology.
Tier 1 grant success Grants Applications
Utility model
only Total % Granted
Average
remaining life Tier 1
Baker Hughes 108 53 161 67.1% 13.1
Halliburton 95 56 151 62.9% 13.3
Schlumberger 121 26 147 82.3% 7.9
Mitsubishi 30 60 2 92 32.6% 7.7
Toshiba 19 41 60 31.7% 9.7
Fuji Electric 22 17 39 56.4% 8.5
Sinopec 3 16 20 39 7.7% 12.4
Kolon Global 17 19 36 47.2% 10.7
Daesung 28 6 34 82.4% 15.9
Corona Corp 13 19 32 40.6% 15.7

21
• At a high level, the metrics that make up the IP Strength Index cover the level of investment by the applicant, downstream 3rd party impact,
commitment and success/patentability of the patent applications, the breadth of the technology covered by the invention and the age of the patent.
Specifically, the Strength Index measures:
• Geographic Filing Breadth
• Grant Success/Grant Commitment and Granted Patent Locations
• Frequency of Citation by Downstream Patent Applications
• Technical Breadth
• Patent Age
• These measurements are combined together statistically, typically self-referential to the dataset at hand, to provide an overall strength score per patent
family. The family definition used is that specific to the Derwent World Patents Index™, which provides for a synonymous relationship between each
family and an individual “invention” – e.g. one specific set of claims language in each legal jurisdiction in which protection has been sought.
• This IP strength index score is then aggregated across portfolios and technologies for benchmarking purposes.
Clarivate IP Strength Index™

22
Tier 1 Entities: Portfolio Quality
• The table above represents the portfolio quality of various Tier 1 Entities in terms of various quantitative parameters.
• Baker Hughes and Halliburton have high IP strength portfolio, whereas Baker Hughes and Schlumberger exhibit high family citations.
• Daesung and Corona Corp showcase a healthy average remaining life which shows that their technology is recent and has a good space to evolve.
Tier 1
Total
inventions
Average
remaining life Novelty Score
Geographic
filing breadth
Technical
breadth score Impact score
Average IP
analytics strength
score
Score of Highest
scoring invention
Baker Hughes 161 13.1 17.8 2.6 2.6 18.67 53 121
Halliburton 151 13.3 15.0 3.2 2.8 15.22 59 126
Schlumberger 147 7.9 23.9 2.8 2.5 24.42 29 101
Mitsubishi 92 7.7 6.3 1.1 1.9 3.84 14 80
Toshiba 60 9.7 7.9 1.6 2.0 5.44 22 116
Fuji Electric 39 8.5 12.6 1.7 2.7 6.97 24 91
Sinopec 39 12.4 4.7 1.0 3.1 2.79 23 48
Kolon Global 36 10.7 4.4 1.1 1.5 3.02 10 36
Daesung 34 15.9 6.5 1.0 2.9 6.40 32 76
Corona Corp 32 15.7 6.4 1.0 3.2 3.83 27 39

23
• Even more attractive than high strength
portfolios are those portfolios that are both
high strength and recent, i.e., have longer in-
force life.
• Typically, Strength and Recency are inversely
proportional, and especially those closest to
the High Strength/High Recency upper right-
hand quadrant are of particular interest.
• Baker Hughes and Halliburton have a portfolio
which has higher than expected combinations
of IP analytics Strength and average remaining
life.
• Daesung and Corona Corp have the highest
remaining life but falls short in terms of IP
strength score which may be due to several
factors which work against the younger
portfolios.

24
Tier 1 Entities: Filing Strategy
• Another ranking methodology is to plot
Technical Breadth – the average number of
technical categories addressed by all patent
families in an entity’s portfolio, against Filing
Breadth – the average number of countries in
which all patent families in the portfolio are
filed. Both parameters reflect potential
commercial value of the IP.
• Based on this approach, Halliburton, Baker
Hughes and Schlumberger rank high in
combined technical and filing breadth.
• Corona Corp and Sinopec have portfolio with
high technical breadth but on the lower side of
filing breadth.

25
Tier 1 Assignee - priority country and family member countries
• The representation above indicates the priority country and family member countries of filings by tier 1 entities. Purple color
represents priority countries and green color represents family member countries.
• Halliburton is the only company which is taking the PCT route for most of its filings, it shows their intent to protect and
commercialize their technology globally
• Baker Hughes, Halliburton, and Schlumberger whose major chunk of priority filings comes from USA (their home country) have
protected their technology globally, covering almost every major market.
• South Korea is completely dominated by Daesung and Kolon Global (Korean companies) and it is the only market in which no
other foreign player is present.
Priority Countries Family member countries
Tier 1
China
UnitedStatesJapan
SouthKoreaPCT
UnitedKingdom
EPO
France
Canada
Italy
Mexico
China
UnitedStatesPCT
Japan
SouthKoreaEPO
Canada
Germany
Australia
UnitedKingdom
Mexico
Russia
Norway
Brazil
India
France
New
ZealandSpain
Taiwan
SingaporePhilippinesSouthAfricaIndonesia
Italy
Sweden
Argentina
GulfCooperationCouncilMalaysia
Belgium
Vietnam
BAKERHUGHES 159 1 1 14 158 108 33 34 1 11 46 12 13 40 24 10 1 6 6 1 2 4 3 1
HALLIBURTON 69 81 1 27 140 118 1 59 73 8 52 27 35 2 21 3 4 2 2 5 1 1 1 10 1 1
SCHLUMBERGER 91 6 16 16 17 1 13 127 60 3 45 41 17 35 32 22 3 27 14 4 15 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 1
MITSUBISHI 87 5 4 6 7 89 3 2 1
TOSHIBA 55 2 1 2 1 11 4 57 1 8 1 1 1 2 6 2 2
FUJIELECTRIC 39 7 7 39 2 7 1 6 6
SINOPEC 39 39
KOLON GLOBAL 36 1 1 1 36 1
DAESUNG 34 1 34
CORONA CORP 32 32

26
Tier 2 Entities and Timeline
• The above heat maps show the filing activity of Tier 2 entities (filings 15 – 30 inventions) over the past 20 years with the most recent activity.
• Shanxi Kelin Energy, Tianjin University and Weatherford International are the leading innovators amongst tier 2 entities in Geothermal
technology
• Shanxi Kelin Energy, Tianjin Donglihu Energy Technology and Hunan Zhongda Jingwei Geothermal Dev Tec have recency of 100% each and are
the prominent emerging entities.
Tier 2 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Total
inventions
% Recency
(inventions
filed since
2010)
Shanxi Kelin Energy 18 12 30 100%
Tianjin University 1 1 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 3 6 30 77%
Weatherford International 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 18 30 73%
Ormat Technologies 2 2 1 1 1 5 3 1 1 1 5 5 1 29 41%
Prad Res & Dev 4 2 2 3 3 2 4 3 2 3 1 29 31%
Sofitech 2 3 3 3 2 3 5 1 4 26 0%
Nippon Steel 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 4 2 2 1 24 21%
Ohbayashi Gumi 1 1 1 3 6 2 2 4 2 22 73%
Rehau 1 1 5 3 5 3 2 2 22 32%
General Electric 2 1 1 4 3 4 2 2 1 20 60%
Altarock Energy 8 5 3 3 19 32%
Earth to Air Systems 2 3 3 1 1 5 3 1 19 5%
Simbol 16 3 19 16%
Tianjin Donglihu Energy Technology 3 8 6 2 19 100%
China Univ of Petroleum 1 2 4 10 19 89%
Hunan Zhongda Jingwei Geothermal Dev Tec 18 18 100%
Nalco 4 1 2 2 1 5 1 1 1 18 11%
Foro Energy 7 1 2 1 2 2 15 47%
Kigam Korea Inst Geoscience & Mineral 1 4 2 2 6 15 67%
Tracto-Tech 1 3 4 2 2 2 1 15 20%

27
• The table above represents the portfolio quality of various Tier 2 Entities in terms of qualitative parameters
• China Univ of Petroleum and Hunan Zhongda Jingwei Geothermal Dev Tec have the highest average remaining life.
• Prad Res & Dev is leading in most of the above qualitative parameters with Foro Energy having the highest IP analytics strength portfolio
amongst the Tier 2 Entities
Tier 2 Total inventions
Average
remaining life
Geographic filing
breadth Novelty Score
Technical breadth
score
Citation impact (average
age weighted)
Average IP analytics
strength score
Score of Highest
scoring
invention
Shanxi Kelin Energy 30 10.7 1.0 2.9 2.4 0.1 9 19
Tianjin University 30 11.7 1.0 4.5 3.4 0.2 22 57
Weatherford International 30 14.4 2.4 10.6 3.4 1.0 48 105
Ormat Technologies 29 9.6 2.4 22.4 3.3 0.8 36 86
Prad Res & Dev 29 9.6 3.8 22.4 2.8 1.5 47 101
Sofitech 26 2.5 6.0 36.6 2.4 3.1 16 52
Nippon Steel 24 8.0 3.3 19.8 1.5 0.6 34 105
Ohbayashi Gumi 22 12.9 1.0 10.1 1.3 0.2 23 44
Rehau 22 11.5 1.6 9.0 1.9 0.3 25 54
General Electric 20 13.4 2.4 16.2 1.7 0.6 47 114
Altarock Energy 19 12.1 1.7 14.6 4.1 0.6 33 79
Earth to Air Systems 19 8.6 2.4 21.3 2.4 0.7 27 68
Simbol 19 12.3 1.1 16.3 1.7 0.1 22 45
Tianjin Donglihu Energy Technology 19 7.5 1.0 7.5 2.4 0.0 15 42
China Univ of Petroleum 19 17.5 1.0 2.5 4.5 0.1 46 60
Hunan Zhongda Jingwei Geothermal Dev Tec 18 17.3 1.0 1.3 4.7 0.0 41 54
Nalco 18 7.2 5.4 29.5 1.2 1.1 41 105
Foro Energy 15 12.7 1.8 18.5 3.4 2.6 50 91
Kigam Korea Inst Geoscience & Mineral 15 13.5 1.3 12.1 2.4 0.3 31 81
Tracto-Tech 15 10.5 1.9 11.1 2.0 0.3 26 55

28
• As mentioned earlier, even more attractive
than high strength portfolios are those
portfolios that are both high strength and
recent, i.e., have longer in-force life.
• Typically, Strength and Recency are inversely
proportional, and especially those closest to
the High Strength/High Recency upper right-
hand quadrant are of particular interest.
• China Univ of Petroleum, Weatherford
International, Hunan Zhongda Jingwei
Geothermal Dev Tec, General Electric and Foro
Energy have portfolios with higher than
expected combinations of IP analytics Strength
and average remaining life.

30
Technical Categories Yield
• The above table shows the volume of level 1 categories and the
representation of level 1 categories in the complete dataset.
• Further, the table on the right shows the volume of level 2 categories
and the % of level 2 categories within the respective level 1
categories. Also, one invention can fit into multiple segments and sub-
technology categories.
Level 1 category
Total
inventions
Level 1 category % representation in
collection Level 1 category Level 2 sub-categories Tot
Well Drilling, Extraction and Maintenance 2890 49.7%
Well Bore Equipment 4653 80.0%
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-categories Total inventions
% of Level 1
category
Well Drilling, Extraction
and Maintenance
Well Casing 563 19%
Well Head 243 8%
Well Maintenance 697 24%
Drilling 1375 48%
Well Flow 193 7%
Well Stimulation 75 3%
Well Fluid 1243 43%
Cementing 309 11%
New Drilling Technologies 120 4%
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 2%
Extraction of Minerals 261 9%
Separators 381 8%
Silencers 14 < 1%
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 50%
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 22%
Valves 867 19%
Condenser 461 10%
Pumps 2068 44%
Gas Removal System 47 1%
NCG Treatment System 48 1%
Cooling Towers 65 1%
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 76 2%
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 22%
Centralizers 28 1%
Well bore equipment
and Maintenance

31
Timeline of level 2 Sub Categories
• The table alongside indicates patenting activity over time (priority filings/year) for all of the Level 2 categories.
• New Drilling Technologies and Valves appear to be having the most recent filings in the overall geothermal technology landscape.
• Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) and Centralizers have the highest Average annual growth rate in the last 5 years, depicting a good level of R&D
being done in this field
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-category 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Total
inventions
% Recency
(inventions filed
since 2011)
AAGR (last 5
years)
and Maintenance
Well Casing 5 8 8 12 9 8 6 14 13 12 16 32 28 32 29 36 49 51 57 42 48 47 563 52% 8%
Well Head 3 2 1 1 6 6 1 5 6 13 2 9 14 10 17 18 11 16 22 26 31 23 243 53% 16%
Well Maintenance 14 8 4 13 12 18 10 18 17 23 26 20 34 35 46 46 56 75 74 52 51 43 697 50% 5%
Drilling 17 12 15 20 24 31 16 20 31 38 76 83 74 89 91 112 122 123 136 90 92 60 1375 45% -2%
Well Flow 5 4 5 6 2 1 3 8 5 3 3 7 12 14 17 17 24 27 9 19 2 193 51% 20%
Well Stimulation 1 1 1 2 1 2 4 2 2 2 4 10 4 8 9 13 7 2 75 52% 8%
Well Fluid 29 16 16 32 29 22 17 24 29 49 40 32 55 77 114 102 100 120 127 87 82 39 1243 45% -3%
Cementing 11 8 13 7 7 6 10 5 11 14 19 12 10 11 22 19 23 26 20 18 12 25 309 40% -6%
New Drilling Technologies 3 2 2 1 1 16 12 10 13 7 20 12 10 11 120 61% 23%
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 4 4 5 9 5 7 11 2 3 3 67 46% 4%
Extraction of Minerals 10 5 6 7 5 6 1 7 9 7 8 9 13 14 31 18 20 22 18 17 15 13 261 40% -3%
Separators 9 3 8 7 3 3 5 9 8 4 4 11 20 16 26 25 31 22 39 37 55 35 381 57% 23%
Silencers 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 14 50% NA
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 28 12 15 9 19 15 16 31 34 31 75 95 153 129 174 189 217 222 187 219 239 207 2321 56% 6%
Steam Turbine-Generator 25 14 17 15 8 15 13 21 15 37 13 35 47 67 71 66 101 100 93 89 96 67 1029 53% 10%
Valves 6 5 10 5 7 5 1 8 8 18 20 30 52 32 56 67 74 94 72 95 101 97 867 61% 10%
Condenser 15 6 14 6 6 5 5 9 5 10 4 12 22 27 34 30 43 37 35 39 53 41 461 54% 14%
Pumps 24 12 12 21 8 17 10 28 29 40 39 73 114 122 167 155 191 181 208 223 220 171 2068 58% 8%
Gas Removal System 1 5 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 6 2 3 3 4 2 47 43% 13%
NCG Treatment System 5 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 3 5 4 3 1 4 48 42% 1%
Cooling Towers 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 6 2 7 5 6 9 4 9 4 65 57% 22%
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 1 2 1 1 12 2 15 10 9 3 2 9 9 76 55% 41%
Sensing and Measuring Systems 8 9 8 9 10 14 7 7 10 14 30 45 60 60 72 87 94 111 108 94 85 57 1002 55% 0%
Centralizers 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 1 2 4 3 6 28 57% 40%
and Maintenance
Well bore equipment

32
Level 2 Sub Categories- Portfolio Quality
• The table alongside indicates the overall
qualitative summary of technical categories in
terms of IP analytics strength score and
average remaining life.
• New Drilling Technologies and Well Stimulation
have high average remaining life along with
good IP analytics strength score which means
in recent times these categories are gaining
good momentum.
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-category
Average IP
analytics strength
score
Average
remaining life Total inventions Level 1 category
Maintenance
Well Casing 29 11.2 563
Well Head 30 10.6 243
Well Maintenance 34 11.2 697
Drilling 36 11.4 1375
Well Flow 39 11.6 193
Well Stimulation 39 12.3 75
Well Fluid 30 11.1 1243
Cementing 31 10.2 309
New Drilling Technologies 40 13.9 120
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 29 11.9 67
Extraction of Minerals 29 10.9 261
Separators 25 10.9 381
Silencers 19 9.8 14
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 21 10.9 2321
Steam Turbine-Generator 22 11.2 1029
Valves 23 11.1 867
Condenser 21 10.7 461
Pumps 21 11.2 2068
Gas Removal System 28 10.4 47
NCG Treatment System 25 9.4 48
Cooling Towers 22 10.5 65
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 27 12.6 76
Sensing and Measuring Systems 31 11.8 1002
Centralizers 36 11.9 28
Maintenance
Well bore equipment

33
Level 2 Sub Categories- Portfolio Quality
• The graphical representation alongside
indicate overall portfolio based on level 2
categories on a plane defined by Recency and
IP Analytics Strength Index.
• The top right quadrant marked by High IP
strength score and High average remaining life
is the most desirable. Technologies falling
under this quadrant have a good future scope
for development.
• New Drilling Technologies, Well Stimulation,
Well flow and Centralizers are the categories
to have a close look on in the geothermal
energy technology landscape.

34
Level 2 Sub Categories - Tier 1
• The category emphasis table alongside shows
the number of inventions in each category for
Tier 1 entities. Also, each of the level 2 sub-
category as a percentage of the level 1
category is shown in this table.
• Schlumberger, Baker and Halliburton within
the Tier 1 entities appears to have a well
spread out portfolio across all technological
areas.
• Baker Hughes, Halliburton and Schlumberger,
appear to have majority of their expertise in
level 1 category “Well Drilling, Extraction and
Maintenance” whereas other companies such
as Mitsubishi, Toshiba and Fuji Electric appear
to have expertise in level 1 category “Well bore
equipment”
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-category Total inventions
% Tier 1
contribution BAKERHUGHES
HALLIBURTON
SCHLUM
BERGER
M
ITSUBISHI
TOSHIBA
FUJIELECTRIC
SINOPEC
KOLON
GLOBAL
DAESUNG
CORONA
CORP
and Maintenance
Well Casing 563 16% 19 23 22 2 1 1 8 2 13
Well Head 243 12% 2 4 12 2 9 1
Well Maintenance 697 23% 45 54 38 4 6 9 7
Drilling 1375 25% 122 105 94 2 1 14 1 5
Well Flow 193 34% 27 14 20 4
Well Stimulation 75 41% 11 13 5 2
Well Fluid 1243 18% 63 58 46 28 10 14 5 1 3
Cementing 309 31% 7 38 40 2 6 2
New Drilling Technologies 120 20% 10 10 4
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 3% 1 1
Extraction of Minerals 261 11% 5 11 9 2 1 2
Separators 381 13% 1 1 5 23 6 6 5 4
Silencers 14 21% 1 1 1
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 5% 5 6 1 16 10 8 15 21 26 5
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 14% 1 2 5 34 44 27 4 3 26
Valves 867 10% 9 10 15 7 11 6 11 4 7 9
Condenser 461 18% 1 18 22 13 4 1 2 23
Pumps 2068 7% 9 12 15 13 2 5 16 24 19 32
Gas Removal System 47 19% 4 2 3
NCG Treatment System 48 31% 8 4 3
Cooling Towers 65 14% 1 4 4
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 76 3% 1 1
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 20% 75 51 37 7 2 9 7 1 5 8
Centralizers 28 21% 4 2
and Maintenance
Well bore equipment

35
Level 2 Sub Categories - Tier 2
• The category emphasis table
alongside shows the number of
inventions in each category for
Tier 2 entities. Also, each of the
level 2 sub-category as a
percentage of the level 1
category is shown in this table.
• Weatherford International and
Ormat Technologies within Tier 2
entities appear to have a well
spread out portfolio across all
technological areas.
• Simbol appears to be in market
of Extraction of Mineral, even
ahead of Tier 1 entities.
Level 2 sub-category Total inventions
% Tier 1
contribution SHANXIKELIN
ENERGY
TIANJIN
UNIVERSITY
W
EATHERFORD
INTERNATIONAL
ORM
ATTECHNOLOGIES
PRAD
RES&
DEV
SOFITECH
NIPPON
STEEL
OHBAYASHIGUM
I
REHAU
GENERALELECTRIC
ALTAROCKENERGY
EARTH
TO
AIRSYSTEM
S
SIM
BOL
TIANJIN
DONGLIHU
ENERGYTECHNOLOGY
CHINAUNIVOFPETROLEUM
HUNAN
ZHONGDAJINGW
EIGEOTHERM
ALDEVTEC
NALCO
FORO
ENERGY
KIGAM
KOREA
INSTGEOSCIENCE&M
INERAL
TRACTO-TECH
Well Casing 563 16% 1 10 1 6 6 3 8 3 3 7 6 3 2
Well Head 243 12% 2 6 1 2 1 2 2 3 1
Well Maintenance 697 23% 1 12 2 11 6 3 1 1 4 4 3 1 9 2 10 1 1
Drilling 1375 25% 1 17 5 11 5 9 2 1 3 8 1 9 7 2 14 1 3
Well Flow 193 34% 1 9 4 8 3 4 1 1 1
Well Stimulation 75 41% 2 1 4 5 3 1
Well Fluid 1243 18% 6 10 18 11 11 2 1 2 8 12 4 7 1 13 17 5 3
Cementing 309 31% 8 11 23 1 8 1 3 13 1
New Drilling Technologies 120 20% 2 2 1 1 9 4 8
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 3% 1
Extraction of Minerals 261 11% 10 2 1 2 1 19 1 1
Separators 381 13% 4 6 7 1 5 2 2
Silencers 14 21%
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 5% 16 19 1 3 9 15 21 2 13 11 5 13 1 6 15
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 14% 13 12 10 2 5 6 7 8 8 4
Valves 867 10% 9 12 4 1 1 3 1 7 8 4 3
Condenser 461 18% 3 16 9 1 2 1 4 8
Pumps 2068 7% 11 21 9 6 5 4 7 4 5 2 9 9 12 9 11
Gas Removal System 47 19% 1 1
NCG Treatment System 48 31% 10 1
Cooling Towers 65 14% 2
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 76 3% 2 7 1
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 20% 14 4 13 3 11 1 1 13 3 8 9 3 2 4 1 9
Centralizers 28 21%

36
Level 2 Sub Categories – Priority Countries (1/2)
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-category Total inventions China
UnitedStates
Japan
SouthKorea
Germ
any
PCT
UnitedKingdom
Russia
EPO
France
Canada
Italy
Netherlands
Austria
Sw
eden
Australia
Norw
ay
Taiwan
Sw
itzerland
Brazil
M
exico
Poland
and Maintenance
Well Casing 563 157 191 41 64 14 15 22 5 7 14 3 1 4 1 5 4 4 3 1
Well Head 243 101 86 4 6 3 5 17 3 4 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1
Well Maintenance 697 153 314 47 33 21 29 25 9 11 6 3 2 1 1 4 4 13 1 2 1 3
Drilling 1375 239 702 54 49 57 79 45 14 17 19 11 5 13 4 6 8 13 2 5 4 8 1
Well Flow 193 29 108 9 2 4 16 14 2 1 1 1 1
Well Stimulation 75 4 53 1 1 1 7 3 2 1 1
Well Fluid 1243 198 545 149 62 54 42 43 18 20 17 8 8 6 4 10 6 8 5 1 11 5 1
Cementing 309 64 130 10 6 11 11 13 7 18 22 3 1 3 2 3 2
New Drilling Technologies 120 18 81 2 2 5 1 1 5 2 1
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 24 14 13 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
Extraction of Minerals 261 33 139 14 7 28 4 7 3 7 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 1
Separators 381 161 75 62 39 5 1 12 12 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1
Silencers 14 3 2 2 1 1 1 2 1
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 1009 246 254 343 226 13 21 16 32 20 13 10 13 24 15 2 6 5 10 2 3 6
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 315 173 235 143 16 14 11 32 5 5 9 11 4 1 6 4 8 3 11 3 1
Valves 867 441 130 56 160 6 14 19 9 2 3 3 2 2 1 5 1 1 2 1 4
Condenser 461 187 62 94 58 7 5 7 12 3 4 2 2 2 2 3 4 3
Pumps 2068 888 253 249 424 47 21 25 46 12 16 10 6 10 2 6 6 3 3 2 7 1 3
Gas Removal System 47 8 19 12 1 1 1 4 1
NCG Treatment System 48 4 19 18 1 1 4
Cooling Towers 65 30 8 16 9 1
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 76 18 31 24 1 2
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 266 290 57 78 130 54 21 13 22 15 3 11 2 7 1 5 2 7 1 4 1
Centralizers 28 8 8 1 1 2 2 1 3
and Maintenance
Well bore equipment

37
Level 2 Sub Categories – Priority Countries (2/2)
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-category Total inventions
India
Rom
ania
Spain
New
Zealand
CzechRepublic
Finland
Hungary
Slovakia
Indonesia
Turkey
Belgium
SouthAfricaDenm
ark
Iceland
PhilippinesArgentina
Colom
bia
Greece
Latvia
Luxem
bourgUnitedArabEm
irates
and Maintenance
Well Casing 563 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Well Head 243 1 1 1 1
Well Maintenance 697 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Drilling 1375 3 5 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1
Well Flow 193 1 3 1
Well Stimulation 75 1
Well Fluid 1243 3 1 3 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
Cementing 309 1 1 1
New Drilling Technologies 120 1 1
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 2
Extraction of Minerals 261 1 1 2 1
Separators 381 1 1 1 1
Silencers 14 1
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 2 2 6 2 4 4 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 5 5 1 3 1 1 1 1 1
Valves 867 1 1 1 1 1
Condenser 461 2 1 1
Pumps 2068 1 10 3 1 5 3 3 1 1
Gas Removal System 47
NCG Treatment System 48 1
Cooling Towers 65 1
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 76
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 6 2 1 1 1 1
Centralizers 28 2
and Maintenance
Well bore equipment

38
Level 2 Sub Categories – Family Member Countries (1/2)
Total
inventions
China
UnitedStates
PCT
Japan
SouthKoreaEPO
Canada
Germ
any
Australia
UnitedKingdom
M
exico
Russia
Norw
ay
Brazil
India
France
New
Zealand
Spain
Taiwan
SingaporePhilippinesSouthAfricaIndonesia
Well Drilling,
Extraction and
Maintenance
Well Casing 563 189 235 165 57 69 81 85 31 62 44 35 20 25 22 19 13 8 6 2 10 1 8 3
Well Head 243 114 105 72 10 8 43 42 6 30 17 25 12 10 15 9 2 3 7 1 1 4
Well Maintenance 697 200 384 255 63 38 121 137 39 105 64 61 31 49 38 30 4 14 6 2 10 5 12 5
Drilling 1375 372 846 525 105 67 268 280 98 179 132 126 61 95 86 47 23 17 15 5 22 9 23 15
Well Flow 193 41 133 86 13 4 40 40 6 27 28 16 6 23 9 5 1 4 2 1 1 3
Well Stimulation 75 9 61 36 2 1 11 18 5 14 7 6 8 3 3 2 2 1 1 1
Well Fluid 1243 285 618 446 195 76 204 192 90 147 78 82 40 65 64 44 16 25 17 20 19 15 23 15
Cementing 309 84 177 117 19 6 82 76 34 60 31 35 13 35 20 6 19 4 2 3 1 2 2
New Drilling Technologies 120 25 86 56 1 2 18 25 2 15 2 7 4 1 6 3 1 1 1 1
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 27 21 17 2 15 10 4 6 7 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1
Extraction of Minerals 261 48 143 94 34 10 41 33 32 28 10 20 8 9 5 9 3 9 6 1 3 11 4 5
Separators 381 175 88 54 71 45 21 21 8 18 10 7 14 3 8 10 6 2 1 2 5 3 4
Silencers 14 3 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 1061 306 243 288 357 189 83 237 57 29 22 34 14 18 28 20 12 17 18 11 8 7 9
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 346 214 127 259 149 59 26 22 36 12 24 40 3 15 24 6 16 2 11 1 16 3 11
Valves 867 466 164 84 66 163 50 43 8 34 22 20 23 12 15 10 3 5 2 1 7 2 7 4
Condenser 461 197 75 50 106 61 24 2 8 10 7 7 15 1 4 4 8 1 4 9 8
Pumps 2068 923 301 191 266 431 98 77 52 57 32 9 55 13 20 18 16 9 7 6 4 6 4 7
Gas Removal System 47 9 20 11 12 2 2 10 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
NCG Treatment System 48 5 19 15 21 1 5 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 4 3
Cooling Towers 65 32 10 5 18 10 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) 76 20 34 20 2 24 10 3 10 1 1 1 2 1
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 312 368 258 62 80 152 107 142 67 75 40 27 56 34 14 16 7 8 3 6 7 6 10
Centralizers 28 13 14 9 1 1 6 7 2 1 1 1 2 2 1
Well Drilling,
Extraction and
Maintenance
Well bore equipment

39
Level 2 Sub Categories – Family Member Countries (2/2)
Total
inventions Italy
Netherlands
Austria
Sw
eden
Israel
Sw
itzerland
Argentina
CzechRepublic
GulfCooperationCouncil
HongKong
Poland
Rom
ania
Hungary
M
alaysia
Belgium
Finland
Vietnam
Turkey
Slovakia
Denm
ark
Luxem
bourg
Thailand
Well Drilling,
Extraction and
Maintenance
Well Casing 563 3 1 5 1 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 1 1
Well Head 243 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Well Maintenance 697 2 1 3 3 3 2 7 6 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1
Drilling 1375 7 12 5 7 5 4 11 7 9 2 1 2 4 4 1 5 2 1 1 1
Well Flow 193 1 2 1 2 2 1
Well Stimulation 75 3 2 1 1 1
Well Fluid 1243 7 6 3 7 5 4 7 8 3 1 1 3 2 3 2 2 2 1 1
Cementing 309 1 1 2 4 6 2 1
New Drilling Technologies 120 2
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 67 1 2 2
Extraction of Minerals 261 1 2 1 4 2 1 2 1 2
Separators 381 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1
Silencers 14 1
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 2321 8 12 16 12 8 9 3 3 1 4 6 2 5 2 2 2 1 2 1
Steam Turbine-Generator 1029 10 3 2 5 4 3 2 1 5 1 1 1
Valves 867 2 2 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1
Condenser 461 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 1
Pumps 2068 3 9 3 4 5 2 3 5 2 2 2 10 3 1 1 3 1 1
Gas Removal System 47 1 1
NCG Treatment System 48 4 3 3
Cooling Towers 65
Sensing and Measuring Systems 1002 11 1 4 1 1 5 4 1 4 1 2 1 1
Centralizers 28
Well Drilling,
Extraction and
Maintenance
Well bore equipment

40
• The next 2 slides show the top 5 assignees for each level 2 sub-technology categories based on volume.
• Most of the entities in top 5 assignees in each level 2 sub-technology are in the Tier 1 bucket.
• Schlumberger is present in the top 5 Assignees in most of the level 2 sub-technologies of geothermal technology landscape based on volume
• In New Drilling Technologies, Altarock Energy (Tier 2) is closely following the top companies- Halliburton and Baker Hughes.
• In Extraction of Minerals– Simbol (Tier 2) is the market leader.
• In Enhanced geothermal system (EGS)– Henan Yuanfang Hot Dry Rock Exploration (Tier 3) and Altarock Energy (Tier 2) are amongst the Top 5 Assignees.
• Almost all the sub categories of Level 1 category “Well Drilling, Extraction and Maintenance” are led by Baker Hughes, Halliburton or Schlumberger.
Technical categories – Most Prolific Assignees

41
Technical categories - Most Prolific Assignees (1/2)
Level 2 sub-category Top 5 entities Total inventions
Well casing
HALLIBURTON 23
SCHLUMBERGER 22
BAKER HUGHES 19
DAESUNG 13
WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL 10
SCHLUMBERGER 12
HAMPTON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS 11
SINOPEC 9
SHELL OIL 5
HALLIBURTON 54
BAKER HUGHES 45
SCHLUMBERGER 38
PRAD RES & DEV 11
BAKER HUGHES 122
HALLIBURTON 105
SCHLUMBERGER 94
FORO ENERGY 14
BAKER HUGHES 27
SCHLUMBERGER 20
HALLIBURTON 14
PRAD RES & DEV 8
HALLIBURTON 13
BAKER HUGHES 11
SCHLUMBERGER 5
ALTAROCK ENERGY 5
SOFITECH 4
Well casing
Well head
Well maintenance
Drilling
Well flow
Well stimulation
BAKER HUGHES 63
HALLIBURTON 58
SCHLUMBERGER 46
MITSUBISHI 28
ORMAT TECHNOLOGIES 18
SCHLUMBERGER 40
HALLIBURTON 38
SOFITECH 23
HUNAN ZHONGDA JINGWEI GEOTHERMAL DEV TEC 13
PRAD RES & DEV 11
HALLIBURTON 10
BAKER HUGHES 10
ALTAROCK ENERGY 9
FORO ENERGY 8
SCHLUMBERGER 4
BEIJING INST EXPLORATION ENG 3
LIANYUNGANG TIANMING EQUIP CO LTD 2
HALLIBURTON 1
SCHLUMBERGER 1
EXXONMOBIL 1
SIMBOL 19
HALLIBURTON 11
SCHLUMBERGER 9
UNION OIL CO 7
MITSUBISHI 23
SHANGHAI KAISHAN ENERGY EQUIP CO LTD 6
ZHEJIANG KAISHAN ENERGY EQUIP CO LTD 6
TOSHIBA 6
Separators
Well fluid
Cementing
New drilling technologies
Ultra-deep drilling technologies
Extraction of Minerals

42
Technical categories - Most Prolific Assignees (2/2)
COMISION FEDERAL ELECTRICIDAD 2
SCHLUMBERGER 1
SINOPEC 1
YANG HYUB CO LTD 1
HALLIBURTON 1
DAESUNG 26
REHAU 21
KOLON GLOBAL 21
TIANJIN UNIVERSITY 19
MITSUBISHI 16
TOSHIBA 44
MITSUBISHI 34
FUJI ELECTRIC 27
CORONA CORP 26
SHANXI KELIN ENERGY 13
SCHLUMBERGER 15
TOSHIBA 11
SINOPEC 11
HALLIBURTON 10
CORONA CORP 23
TOSHIBA 22
MITSUBISHI 18
FUJI ELECTRIC 13
CORONA CORP 32
KOLON GLOBAL 24
DAESUNG 19
SINOPEC 16
Steam turbine-generator
Valves
Pumps
Condenser
Silencers
Steam piping/Two phase piping
MITSUBISHI 4
FUJI ELECTRIC 3
HTE WATER CORP 3
TOSHIBA 2
SELMAN & ASSOC LTD 2
MITSUBISHI 8
TOSHIBA 4
FUJI ELECTRIC 3
SHANGHAI KAISHAN ENERGY EQUIP CO LTD 3
MITSUBISHI 4
TOSHIBA 4
UNIV BEIJING TECHNOLOGY 2
UNIV CHINA MINING & TECHNOLOGY 2
HENAN YUANFANG HOT DRY ROCK EXPLORATION 9
ALTAROCK ENERGY 7
KIVERDI INC 5
UT-BATTELLE LLC 2
BAKER HUGHES 75
HALLIBURTON 51
SCHLUMBERGER 37
SHANXI KELIN ENERGY 14
BAKER HUGHES 4
HALLIBURTON 2
SHANGHAI XINLIAN PUMP VALVE CO LTD 2
EURODRILL GMBH 2
SANDIA CORP 1
Gas removal system
NCG treatment system
Cooling towers
Enhanced geothermal system (EGS)
Sensing and Measuring Systems
Centralizers

43
• A cross-correlation matrix of categories vs. categories can highlight the degree of co-occurrence of category pairs.
• If an invention appears in two categories, it contains subject matter relevant to both.
• Areas with high co-occurrence may suggest some linkage such as “cause & effect” that may be worth exploring further.
• However, from an IP protection perspective, such highly correlated intersections are “crowded” and may present a greater challenge to innovation.
• Areas with little co-occurrence may represent “white space” that could be further developed, but only if merging of the concepts makes sense
technically and commercially.
Technology Category Cross-Correlation Matrix

44
Tech VS Tech Matrix
Cross-correlation of
technical category
Wellcasing
Wellhead
WellmaintenanceDrilling
Wellflow
WellstimulationWellfluid
Cementing
Newdrillingtechnologies
Ultra-deepdrillingtechnologies
ExtractionofMinerals
Separators
Silencers
Steampiping/Twophasepiping
Steamturbine-generator
Valves
Condenser
Pumps
GasremovalsystemNCGtreatmentsystem
Coolingtowers
Enhancedgeothermalsystem(EGS)
SensingandMeasuringSystems
Centralizers
Well casing 563 93 159 246 33 18 191 108 28 12 25 34 216 34 88 8 195 3 1 14 74 9
Well head 93 243 65 123 32 3 94 28 10 7 16 24 1 70 23 70 9 82 2 2 1 4 43 5
Well maintenance 159 65 697 365 69 40 322 101 41 12 43 43 183 37 109 17 168 6 2 3 3 148 6
Drilling 246 123 365 1375 103 37 409 145 67 59 58 51 4 300 74 156 20 201 10 3 3 24 344 23
Well flow 33 32 69 103 193 5 83 13 12 3 6 14 30 9 29 48 3 1 1 91
Well stimulation 18 3 40 37 5 75 54 17 20 1 12 1 3 4 3 8 1 1 4 13
Well fluid 191 94 322 409 83 54 1243 120 64 23 96 104 2 320 178 134 67 281 20 16 12 29 183 3
Cementing 108 28 101 145 13 17 120 309 17 7 16 10 90 6 18 4 53 5 28 2
New drilling technologies 28 10 41 67 12 20 64 17 120 3 10 6 7 7 10 25 4 15 28
Ultra-deep drilling technologies 12 7 12 59 3 1 23 7 3 67 2 2 14 8 6 4 13 10 9
Extraction of Minerals 25 16 43 58 6 12 96 16 10 2 261 33 32 35 13 25 49 7 13 3 5 23
Separators 34 24 43 51 14 1 104 10 6 2 33 381 1 143 148 101 78 161 24 20 14 1 42
Silencers 1 4 2 1 14 3 4 1 1 4
Steam piping/Two phase piping 216 70 183 300 30 3 320 90 7 14 32 143 3 2321 298 427 157 951 9 5 17 16 320 6
Steam turbine-generator 34 23 37 74 9 4 178 6 7 8 35 148 4 298 1029 269 312 478 18 28 27 9 84 1
Valves 88 70 109 156 29 3 134 18 10 6 13 101 1 427 269 867 155 539 9 2 23 5 176 3
Condenser 8 9 17 20 67 4 4 25 78 157 312 155 461 299 11 28 24 1 35
Pumps 195 82 168 201 48 8 281 53 25 13 49 161 1 951 478 539 299 2068 15 6 40 20 269 1
Gas removal system 3 2 6 10 3 1 20 4 7 24 9 18 9 11 15 47 10 2 1 7
NCG treatment system 1 2 2 3 1 1 16 13 20 5 28 2 28 6 10 48 1 2
Cooling towers 1 3 3 12 3 14 17 27 23 24 40 2 1 65 1 6
Enhanced geothermal system (EGS) 14 4 3 24 1 4 29 5 15 10 5 1 16 9 5 1 20 1 1 76 10
Sensing and Measuring Systems 74 43 148 344 91 13 183 28 28 9 23 42 4 320 84 176 35 269 7 2 6 10 1002 4
Centralizers 9 5 6 23 3 2 6 1 3 1 4 28

45
ThemeScape® Analysis
Sample ThemeScape
• ThemeScape® is powerful tool that provides a qualitative and
visual overview of the main subject matter presented in the data
collection.
• ThemeScape® employs algorithms that analyze the content of
patents (e.g. the title, abstract and claims fields), and places
patent records into different locations based on their technical
similarity to each other.
• Within a map, each dot represents an invention. Inventions with
similar contents are enclosed in a contour. The distances between
inventions are determined by similarity or dissimilarity in their
technical content: the closer in location, the more similar.
• Map coloration corresponds to record density: white for highly
populated, green for moderately populated, and blue for open
space.
• This tool is reliant on statistical “word/phrase frequency”
methods and algorithms → rapid, but lacking in “human”
judgement.
About
ThemeScape®
• Develop preliminary sense of technology addressed in the
domain
• Understand the inter-relation of various technical categories to
derive core research focus areas
• Identify whitespaces present in the domain
• Understand the technological shifts trough slicing across various
priority years
Typical
Applications

46
ThemeScape – Overall Technology
• The representation alongside showcases
distribution of core geothermal technologies on a
ThemeScape
• In the ThemeScape map shown alongside, key
themes in the patent collection noted include
technologies related to:
• Well drilling
• Sensor Technologies
• Steam Turbine/Condenser
• Power generation
• Pumps/ Valves/ Heat exchangers
• Well fluids

Analysis of Pending EP
Applications

48
Overall Timeline
• There are a total of 451 patent families which have at
least one pending EP applications.
• Out of theses 451 patent families, 288 have been
granted in some other country other than EU.
• 158 patents are only in application stage and have
not been granted anywhere.
Invention family
status 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Inventions /
patent families
Grant 2 2 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 9 15 19 36 26 30 21 26 52 20 8 1 288
Applications 1 1 2 2 3 3 6 12 11 15 16 12 25 20 17 12 158
Utility model 1 1 1 2 5
All families 2 2 4 2 4 4 5 5 3 12 18 25 48 38 46 37 39 79 40 25 13 451
Note- Grant means patent is granted in jurisdication other than EP

49
Tech Categorization
Level 1 category Level 2 sub-categories Total inventions
Well Casing 47
Well Head 31
Well Maintenance 72
Drilling 185
Well Flow 28
Well Stimulation 6
Well Fluid 138
Cementing 42
New Drilling Technologies 13
Ultra-deep Drilling Technologies 6
Extraction of Minerals 28
Separators 14
Silencers 0
Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping 132
Steam Turbine-Generator 38
Valves 36
Condenser 16
Pumps 67
Gas Removal System 2
NCG Treatment System 3
Cooling Towers 2
Sensing and Measuring Systems 117
Centralizers 4
and Maintenance
Well bore equipment
• Drilling, Well Fluid, Steam Piping/Two Phase Piping
and Sensing & Measuring systems are the top 4
categories having maximum number of count.

50
Top 20 Assignees and their Timeline
Top 20 Assignees 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Total
inventions
% Recency
(inventions
filed since
2010)
Halliburton 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 27 9 1 53 79%
Baker Hughes 1 1 9 4 6 6 1 28 61%
Schlumberger 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 19 47%
Prad Res & Dev 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 11 55%
Hampton Intellectual Property Holdings 10 10 0%
Nalco 1 1 2 1 1 1 7 29%
Rehau 3 1 2 6 33%
Altarock Energy 1 2 2 5 40%
General Electric 1 2 1 1 5 40%
Greenfield Master 1 1 1 1 1 5 60%
Haka.Gerodur 1 2 1 1 5 40%
Jansen AG 2 1 2 5 60%
Toshiba 1 1 1 2 5 40%
Bp Exploration 2 1 1 4 25%
Foro Energy 1 2 1 4 75%
Chevron 1 2 3 67%
Exxonmobil 2 1 3 33%
Itrec 3 3 100%
Los Alamos Nat Security 1 2 3 100%
Lvdi Master 1 1 1 3 67%

52
• Search string creation and quality control.
• The creation of the search strings for patent collections was performed iteratively, with the results of each generation of search string
reviewed and evaluated to inform and tailor the search to become more accurate.
• As each search string is created, the results are sampled and reviewed for relevancy, and keywords and classifications amended as
appropriate. Further, the results of each string are data mined for further key terms of interest, synonyms and alphanumeric technology
classification codes of relevance, which are then incorporated in revised search strings. This process is repeated for each search until
revisions perform only minor variations in results. At this point, the search string is locked in its configuration.
Source Data and Collection Building

53
• The study is constructed around the Derwent World Patents Index database structure. DWPI uses “patent families” as the definition for each
record, rather than individual patent publication documents. Each invention-related patent application and granted patent is added to the DWPI
family record as it is published. This being the case, all counts of records in the study refer to patent families or inventions, and not to individual
patent documents. For example, the European application, European granted patent and the US granted patent for a single invention family is
counted as “1” in all the analyses in this report unless otherwise noted.
• This provides a more accurate measure of the level of inventive activity from an entity within the technical space, and a truer picture of the
overall level of innovation across the field as a whole.
• As each DWPI record contains potentially many individual publication events, this report uses the earliest known priority filing date for each
patent family. The tables and charts included in the report use this date unless otherwise noted, because it provides the most accurate
indication of the time of the inventive activity.
• A single patent only provides a statutory monopoly for the patented technology within the legal jurisdiction of the authority that granted the
patent. This means that inventors must file applications for a patent in each jurisdiction where they foresee a need for protection.
• Priority refers to the first application for a particular invention which when filed at any patent office becomes the “priority application”, with the
date of this event defining the priority date. The patent office location of the first filing is defined as the priority country. The priority filing
provides the patent applicant with a grace period to file on the same invention in other patent jurisdictions without loss of the “novelty”
requirement for patentability.
• Data for 2015-2017 is incomplete due to 18 months publication lag. It has been highlighted in all the table and charts.
Assumptions and Definitions

54
• Assignee names appearing on patent documents are also inconsistently formatted. To the extent possible, such formatting anomalies are regularized
during the assignee clean-up process, which benefits from the name standardization provided by the Derwent World Patents Index (DWPI) as well as
employing additional automated and manual review. Assignee name reformatting reduces the heterogeneity in assignee names to a more
manageable and more instructive level.
• Assignee names attached to patent documents reflect the ownership at time of document publication. Changes in ownership (reassignments) that
occur after publication may or may not be reflected in the US reassignment field or in the INPADOC legal status field. To the extent the information is
available in these two fields; the assignee name will be updated to reflect the reassignments. It is also expected that in US applications, many
assignees will be “unknown” because assignees may not have been registered with the US PTO before publication. Usually the absent assignee can
be inferred by checking ownership of other patent family members, or by observing assignments in other records by the same inventor. All of these
methods are used to improve the quality of the assignee data to be used for analysis.
• Lastly, company name changes, acquisitions and mergers, and hidden relationships are expected to affect true ownership of patent documents that
may not be reflected in the collection data per se. For selected higher volume or critical assignees, we may rely on information from the Derwent
Patent Assignee Code (PACO) system, and also may obtain information on acquisitions and other company transactions from outside sources, such as
Hoovers Online Business Information and selected company web sites.
Patent Applicant Naming Variations

55
Glossary (1/3)
• Publication – In most countries, a patent application is published 18 months after the priority date. For example, all pending EPO and JPO patent
applications are published 18 months after the priority date. Prior to a change in rules under the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999, USPTO
patent applications were held in confidence until a patent was granted. Patent applications filed at the USPTO on or after 29 November 2000 are
required to be published 18 months after the priority date. However, there are certain exceptions for the publication of pending patents. For
example, an applicant can ask (upon filing) for the patent not to be published by certifying that the invention disclosed in the application has not
and will not be the subject of an application filed in another country.
• Publication date - The date on which the patent application is published (i.e. the information is available to public). This normally occurs 18 months
after the priority date.
• Priority - Priority is a term reflecting the first instance in which a new invention is registered or filed at any patent authority. Related terms include
priority filing location (the patent authority in which the first registration takes place), earliest priority filing date (the earliest known date on which
the patent was first registered).
• Priority Country (Earliest priority country) - Priority country is where the patent is first filed before being (possibly) extended to other countries. (In
all jurisdiction-wise charts and tables earliest priority country is used, except Family Member Geographic Analysis and Geographic Protection Analysis
tables)
• Earliest Priority Year - Earliest priority year is the filing year of the earliest member of the patent family. (In all timeline charts earliest priority year is
used)

56
Glossary (2/3)
• Family member Country - Countries where members of patent family are published
• % filed from 2010 (Recency) - Ratio of the number of inventions filed from 2010 to the total inventions in case of Indian dataset and from 2006 in
case of Non-Indian dataset
• Grant - A temporary right given by the authorized body for a limited time period (normally 20 years) to prevent unauthorized use of the technology
outlined in the patent. A patent application does not automatically give the applicant a temporary right against infringement. A patent has to be
granted for it to be effective and enforceable against infringement.
• Granted Patent - Patent family which has received at least one granted member in the family
• Published Applications - Patent family which has only published applications in the family
• Grant Success % - Ratio of the number of granted family members to the total number of inventions
• Citations - Citations may be made by the examiner or the applicant/inventor. They comprise a list of references that are believed to be relevant prior
art and which may have contributed to the "narrowing" of the original application.
• Family member Country - Countries where members of patent family are published
• % filed from 2010 (Recency) - Ratio of the number of inventions filed from 2010 to the total inventions in case of Indian dataset and from 2006 in
case of Non-Indian dataset

57
Glossary (3/3)
• Grant - A temporary right given by the authorized body for a limited time period (normally 20 years) to prevent unauthorized use of the technology
outlined in the patent. A patent application does not automatically give the applicant a temporary right against infringement. A patent has to be
granted for it to be effective and enforceable against infringement.
• Granted Patent - Patent family which has received at least one granted member in the family
• Published Applications - Patent family which has only published applications in the family
• Grant Success % - Ratio of the number of granted family members to the total number of inventions
• Family Citation Count - Total number of patents citing the patent family
• Impact Score – It is a score given to a patent on the basis of forward citations per year of the patent.
• Novelty Score – It is a score given to a patent on the basis of granted status of the patent family which varies according to the jurisdiction where the
patent is granted.
• Technical Breadth- It is score given to a patent based on the number of technological categories a patent covers in the landscape.
• Filing Breath- It is a score given based on the number of jurisdictions in which the family members are filed.
• Remaining Life (Years to Expiry) - Number of years remaining for the expiry of the earliest filed member of the family

Feedback & Comments
Prepared by Clarivate Analytics for Arnason Faktor - CONFIDENTIAL
Atul Dhaka | India
Atul.dhaka@Clarivate.com
Shamsher Singh | India
Shamsher.singh@Clarivate.com
Jack Hopwood | London
Jack.Hopwood@Clarivate.com

Geothermal Landscape study final

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Geothermal Landscape study final

Similar to Geothermal Landscape study final (20)

More from Iceland Geothermal

More from Iceland Geothermal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Geothermal Landscape study final