California is currently home to the largest concentration of biomedical companies in the world. California’s biomedical industry employs nearly 275,000 people, representing one in six of the 1.6 million biomedical jobs in the United States. The industry supports more than 750,000 direct and indirect jobs statewide and is the second largest sector of California’s high-tech workforce.

Additionally, California’s biomedical industry attracts the greatest portion of venture capital (VC) funding of any industry in California and of any other state, receiving 42% of all venture capital investments in biotech and medical device companies nationally. As a result, there are currently 869 biopharmaceutical products in development in the state, from pre-clinical and clinical development through registration. Nearly one-third of the pipeline (272 products) focuses on treating cancer, according to 2009 research from IMS Health.

California is the birthplace of biotechnology, and our state’s biomedical innovation delivers not only global advances in healthcare but the jobs that drive our economy. While the biomedical industry has weathered the recession, it faces unprecedented challenges – access to capital, the educational funding crisis, and uncertainty surrounding healthcare reform. Now more than ever, I believe the sustainability of California’s biomedical industry depends on decisions made in Sacramento and Washington.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about high-tech innovation

Given the United States’ rich history of immigration and the current hotbed issues surrounding it, this is a small concession that could have profound implications for the future of our nation and economy. Logistics aside – how to define a start-up and what to do if a fledging company fails etc. – this would be an extremely effective means of injecting innovation at the foundations of our country.

As Paul Graham notes in his original treatise, “Letting just 10,000 startup founders into the country each year could have a visible effect on the economy. If we assume 4 people per startup, which is probably an overestimate, that’s 2500 new companies. Each year. They wouldn’t all grow as big as Google, but out of 2500 some would come close.”

Given that these individuals would be building new businesses, they wouldn’t be taking jobs away from Americans, and in all likelihood would be creating more opportunities and industries. Programs that encourage and incentivize the entrepreneurial spirit within our borders are exactly the kind of forward-thinking pathways to progress that we should be pushing for.

[image via nromagna]

Regardless, of the how the foundation moves forward, the potential benefits for Microsoft are numerous, given that many of the early projects will likely focus on the their product ecosystem, despite claims that the foundation will be platform agnostic. Ultimately, the possibility of delivering a better product to consumers was perhaps too good to pass up, in spite of the financial outlay. Think of it as money invested in R&D with greater leverage. Depending on the spin, this announcement can also go far in bolstering Microsoft’s standing in the eyes of the general public as well, the very same people that could be buying their software down the road.

Bill Hilf, general manager of Windows Server, explained the decision on his blog:

“The perspectives on OSS at Microsoft have evolved to the point where Microsoft’s open source strategy is no longer just locked in a single ‘lab’ on campus – now OSS is an important part of many product groups and strategies across the company. We have become increasingly clear on where we work with open source – development methodologies, projects, partners, products and communities – and where our products compete with commercial open source companies or platforms. Today, there are engineering and business leaders across the company, myself included, looking at how to drive interoperability for customers and as a lever for new growth.”

[image via schoschie]

In one move (given its strong web presence), Google announced a plan to build on its online payment platform, Google Checkout, in a bid to create a universal system that will enable newspapers and other media producers to charge for their content online. Think of it as a gated community for that handles content created across multiple sites.

Google collects the micropayments, either through subscriptions or pay-as-you-go plans and distributes the money based on traffic or some other metric. The benefits for the producers are obvious, assuming they’re still able to pull in readers, but the boon for Google is twofold. They collect a percentage on the transactions and get to learn more about their audience’s habits. Which leads me to ask, will the public being willing pay, and will they have any choice?

The other deal is much farther afield. Google announced that it is working hard to improve the tech behind solar thermal heating systems. Essentially, seeking to improve the reflective surfaces to generate greater heat and more efficiencies. A plan that follows with its philanthropic quest to develop green technology, but also has the potential for big pay-outs given that the clean energy market is still relatively new.

But what’s most curious about this move, is that it appears to compete with Google’s early investments in solar, namely  eSolar and Brightsource. Apparently Google was unhappy with the level of innovations happening within this space and is seeking a more active role. This will have to be another wait and see, but with a working prototype expected in the next few months, it appears we’ll know soon enough.

[image via Yodel Anecdotal]

Currently, the high cost to build and maintain offshore turbines combined with their design constraints – they are still installed directly into sea beds and require additional stabilization to deal with the stresses of the ocean currents – they can’t compete on price with conventional land-based models. But with the Hywind’s innovative floating design, wind farms could be installed virtually anywhere, in waters with depths up to 2100 feet.

The dynamic turbine design, which employs stabilization technologies already in use on offshore oil and gas rigs, needs further improvements – lighter materials and blades that spin closer to the water’s surface – before it is economically viable and ready to be manufactured on a mass scale, but it’s early successes have already silenced many critics. Considering the infrastructure to transport the power is relatively inexpensive by comparison, the Hywind could be an attractive solution further down the road and one to keep an eye.

[image via phault]

But in the bigger picture, the success of this program has to be taken as a positive step toward a new mindset. And as much as President Obama has touted the success of this program as the beginning of a new era, we must also realize that the average consumer was as enamored with the rebates, ranging from $3,500 to $4,500, as they were the environmental benefits. I don’t say this to be cynical, but it’s important to be realistic about this.

As a nation, the United States will not simply wake up with a new mindset overnight. There are politics at play, jobs at stake, and many skeptics who must be shown just how much damage our last fifty years has done to the planet. However, the success of the “Cash for Clunkers” program is undoubtedly a step in the right direction, even if there is still red tape to unwind.

As the environmental blog Greenpress noted, “this program was perhaps the seminal step towards weaning the public away from gas guzzlers and enabling them to more easily step into helping the environment. The program’s results have shown that, given the opportunity, people will ’step up’.”

[image via dave_7]

At a time when our country’s economy is struggling to find innovation and get consumers spending again, it’s these same small businesses that we need to rely upon to provide the necessary boost. In an attempt to remain open and continue serving as a valuable community resource, many of these centers have themselves needed to innovate, diversifying their funding efforts and looking for new ways to bring corporations and banks on board.

Given that there is little to no return on investment for providing such backing, these centers have to add value to these business relationships through other means. Whether that takes the form of branded sponsorship, shared community support (in the form of volunteering etc.), opensource collaboration or some other form, I think this could present a real opportunity to rethink the role of these centers not only within the business community, but the community at large as well.

[image via wonderlane]

Godin illustrates the cycle of poverty, pointing to the fact that its very existence is predicated on the fact that there is no savings built into it. Because it is a system of necessity and is therefore reactive, any time there is a crisis, the individual or community slips further into position of lacking things like money, food or medicine, depending on the situation. As a result, the system is almost always in a state of need. How do you create a sustainable charity around that?

However, if we look at developing thoughtful private enterprise, that is opening up markets, then productivity and surplus is often the result. Which ultimately benefits everyone by creating more opportunity. Obviously these businesses need to be of the right type. Godin points to affordable irrigation systems, mosquito nets and solar cookers as perfect examples of these kinds of businesses. The key is to help them get started and understand that until they grow, the return on investment they can offer will be small, but the eventual pay-offs will be more than just the bottom line.

He directs us to the Acumen Fund, explaining it “finds these entrepreneurs on site in the developing world, funds them, teaches them and pushes them to build really big organizations.”

[image via Robert Thomson]

After laying out the problems, the article essentially says the problem will require money and active engagement by governments both in the areas being affected and those abroad that are in a position to help, noting “It’s too important to leave to the market.” And while I understand that wrapped up in that final sentiment, is the idea that private enterprise, particularly in the case of these small businesses that are themselves trying to make ends meet, are essentially only interested in preserving their own bottom lines, I respectively disagree. I feel they can play a vital role in confronting these problems.

In fact a model for how, already exists and I wrote about it over at my Tumblr blog recently. Called ColaLife, the non-profit organization is campaigning for Coca-Cola to open up their worldwide distribution channels and use the empty space in their transportation methods to help deliver essential medicines to areas that need it. It represents a huge opportunity and would require very little effort on soda giant’s part, except they haven’t said yes yet. Although Coke is uniquely positioned, given their iconic brand and global reach, with a bit of innovative thinking, many large corporations could revise their existing operations slightly and find a way to make a difference, no matter what the scale.

So yes, governments will need to be on the same page, but they can’t neglect the potential of private business, instead they need to find ways to utilize it.

[image via André-Pierre]

Which is to say we can’t simply replace one with the other. On top of this, the average charging time, is almost three times as long as traditional fueling, a fact that needs to be taken into consideration when thinking about managing turnover and building in efficiencies.

The article argues and I would agree, that this new space and additional time constraint (not to mention the potential for receiving government funding) represents a real opportunity for existing businesses to leverage this captive audience. As the author notes, 15 minutes is an odd amount of time to utilize, shorter than a shopping trip at Wal-Mart, but longer than a cup of coffee at Starbucks and seeing as how the internet is making trips to banks and post offices less necessary, those options don’t really work either.

Although, it might be the right amount of time for a burger and fries. In fact, McDonald’s is already looking into that possibility, announcing last month that it will be testing out this concept at restaurant located in Cary, North Carolina, with the potential for more to follow. But for as many fast food restaurants as there are (not to mention my problems with many of their practices) and assuming they choose to go down this path, there still will be a real need to develop these charing locations. Leaving the door open for innovation around the idea.

[image via frankh]