Chart of the day: GM doesn't have the green tech patents
Take a look at the left column of the chart above. As displayed in a new report called "Automaker Patent Assets Intelligence Report" by PatentCafe.com, this chart shows that GM's green tech patent focus is far, far smaller (as a percent of total portfolio) when compared to the rest of the auto industry. Note, though, that this chart is based on 2007 data and the "green tech" category isn't exactly perfectly defined. PatentCafe is still willing to make the following claim:
The data suggests that General Motors is diverting resources away from core technologies toward development of telecommunications, lowering its Green Tech priority even further. Toyota, on the other hand, continued its Green Tech commitment with 158 applications compared to General Motors' 20. Is GM pursuing a high risk strategy "against the grain"?This report was submitted as part of the Presidential Auto Task Force. Other findings of note are that Toyota leads the green tech patent race (29.1 percent of its portfolio), Ford is a close second (26.3) and then VW (22.8). There's a lot to know outside the scope of this chart (i.e., Japanese autocompanies often rely on patents from suppliers) and for that we recommend checking out Green Car Advisor and downloading the full report here (PDF).
[Source: PatentCafe via Green Car Advisor]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jharlan 11:26AM (3/31/2009)
Leadership @ GM has failed to respond to market demand. The proof is in their continual lose of market share. The Volt looks like it will be an interesting car, with 2 or 3 of them in Jay Leno's garage, but overpriced and late late late. People who can afford the Volt will be buying Teslas and hybrid Escalades.
Is there any combination of events that could restore GM to their past glory?
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 11:51AM (3/31/2009)
Useless chart. This chart shows that a smaller percentage of GM's patents are for green tech than other companies. However, percentage is a useless measure. This is because a percentage measure means that any non-green patents make GM look like they are worse off on this chart, when additional non-green patents don't diminish GM's actual green patents.
So, for example, if GM had 900 Green tech patents out of about 6,000 patents total, they would show to have a very low percentage (15%) while another company that had only 165 Green tech patents out of 725 total patents would show as better off at 23%. Even though GM had 6x as many green tech patents as the other company.
And in fact this is the case, the other company mentioned is VW.
The report uses the chart to indicate that GM is pursing directions in telecommunications instead of in green tech. And for that it's pretty sketchy info. Trying to use it to say "GM doesn't have the green tech patents" is just plain wrong.
All in all, this report is full of chart junk. It's a patent lawyer trying to justify his own existence.
Reply
Merritt Johnson 11:52AM (3/31/2009)
PatentCafe's report in no way reflects the true number of patents aimed at advanced automotive techonologies. One GM Advanced Technology facility alone had 23 patents issued in 2007 related to electric propulsion. Much of the advancement that goes into control systems and electronics do not fall under the specific Green Tech category. It is disturbing to know that government officials might be making decisions based on this report.
Reply
Brn 12:24PM (3/31/2009)
Whenever the "other" category is that large, the items aren't properly categorized. This chart tells us nothing.
Reply
Tim 1:16PM (3/31/2009)
Liberal spin makes liberals dizzy.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 12:56PM (3/31/2009)
Reading it again, it's funny ABG says VW is 3rd in the green tech patent race when (as I mentioned above) they have less than 1/6th as many patents as GM or Toyota. And when on the 5 rankings (quality, etc), VW comes in last in 3 of the 4 valid categories. Note that I ignored the "fewest number of poor patents" column because it's just stupid. It's basically a reverse ranking of how many patents the companies have. GM and Toyota come in last because they have the most patents and thus the most poor quality patents, VW comes in first because they have the fewest patents and thus the fewest poor quality patents (although as mentioned elsewhere in the article, VW as a percentage also has a low number of poor quality patents, but that's not what this ranking appears to be by).
Reply
MikeG 1:17PM (3/31/2009)
Camper is right. The graph is totally meaningless. Even "Number of Patents" rather than "Percentage of Patents" as shown would not really be fair. For instance, you could patent a tire stem that prevents 1% more air leaks, which could be considered green, but it's net effect doesn't really compare to something like a patent on battery chemistry, which could save lot more fuel usage.
I'd say there are a lot better ways to look at it. Let's look at Dollars spent toward green research, or even give a better definition of "green", like "Pounds of CO2 saved per year" and measure based on that.
Something, anyway, this is one of the dumbest graphs I've ever seen.
Reply