Ledger · 2026-09-01 · Membrane Science & Water Treatment

Supramolecular Membrane Rejuvenation Kits via Metal-Phenolic Network Deposition

Rejected

This concept did not clear the framework. The reasoning is published in full below.

Why it failed

Assessment

The concept fails form factor parity because replacing a single-part caulking gun cartridge with a two-part liquid pumping setup represents a significant operational workflow regression. Per sub-test G, form_factor_parity=false forces like_for_like=false and superiority=false. Additionally, incumbent price parity at $18.00/kg is explicitly acknowledged as an unsourced proxy.

Claimed advantage

>13x improvement in treated area water permeability (13.73-21.66 LMH/bar vs ~0 LMH/bar for polyurethane sealant)

Named comparator: Commercial Polyurethane Adhesive Sealants (e.g. 3M 550 Polyurethane, Henkel Loctite Hysol)

Also flagged

A rejection is not a claim that the science is wrong. It means the venture case did not survive: the comparator was not what the buyer actually buys, the comparison was not like-for-like, the advantage fell short of a step change, or the capital and time to first revenue were prohibitive.

Assessed 2026-09-01 against seven gates plus the voiding sub-tests. How the method works · Browse all concepts