Technology Innovation Leadership Award biohazardous waste treatment North America, 2014
Frost & Sul livan’s Global Research Platform
Frost & Sullivan is in its 50th year in business with a global research organization of 1,800analysts and consultants who monitor more than 300 industries and 250,000 companies. The company’s research philosophy originates with the CEO’s360-Degree Perspective™, which serves as the foundation of its TEAM Research™ methodology. This unique approach enables us to determine how best-in-class companies worldwide manage growth, innovation and leadership. Based on the findings of this Best Practices research, Frost & Sullivan is proud to present the 2014 North American Technology Innovation Leadership Award in Biohazardous Waste Treatment to Ozonator Industries.
Significance of the Technology Innovation Leadership Award
Key Industry Chal lenges Addressed by Superior OZONATOR Technology
Biohazardous wastes need to be handled, treated, and disposed of in a very safe manner in order to avoid possible hazards. Frost & Sullivan notes that this waste clearly requires an efficient, eco-friendly, and cost-effective treatment technology. Treating biohazardous waste using ozone is considered to be the safest approach among all available alternatives.
However, before the ozone-based biohazardous waste treatment technology can be adopted on a wider scale commercially, Frost & Sullivan points out the important industry challenges below.
Lack of treatment efficiency
Existing biohazardous waste treatment technologies perform rather inefficiently, and after treatment, large amounts of residue or by-product are produced, which need to be safely disposed of in a landfill. However, as land availability for landfills is decreasing rapidly, an efficient technology that can maximize the volume reduction of biohazardous waste needs to be identified.
High energy requirement and operating cost
Commonly adopted biohazardous waste treatment technologies, such as incineration, autoclaving, and so on, are highly energy-intensive. The high-energy requirement increases the cost of operation quite significantly. Moreover, in order to address the challenge of global energy scarcity, a reduction in energy requirements is necessary to establish the future sustainability of a biohazardous waste treatment technology.
Lack of sustainability
Frost & Sullivan points out that the existing biohazardous waste treatment technologies are found to be non-sustainable from an environmental point of view. As most of these technologies work in a higher temperature range, and various waste gases are generated and emitted into the atmosphere from these systems, the sustainability of these technologies is often questionable. Moreover, many chemical treatment technologies involve the usage of toxic and hazardous chemicals, which require sufficient treatment before they can be finally discharged into the environment.
Frost & Sullivan firmly believes that the biohazardous waste treatment technology developed by Ozonator Industries has successfully addressed the above challenges. This technology employs the usage of ozone to safely treat biohazardous waste in an energyefficient and cost-effective manner. This zero-emission system completely eliminates the requirement of by-product or residue disposal. As such, the challenge of land availability and environmental sustainability is efficiently addressed by this innovation.
Key Benchmarking Cri teria for Technology Innovat ion Leadership Award
For the Technology Innovation Leadership Award, the following criteria were used to benchmark Ozonator Industries' performance against key competitors:
- Uniqueness of Technology
- Impact on New Products/Applications
- Impact on Functionality
- Impact on Customer Value
- Relevance of Innovation to Industry
Decision Support Matrix and Measurement Criteria
To support its evaluation of best practices across multiple business performance categories, Frost & Sullivan employs a customized Decision Support Matrix (DSM). The DSM is an analytical tool that compares companies’ performance relative to each other with an integration of quantitative and qualitative metrics. The DSM features criteria unique to each Award category and ranks importance by assigning weights to each criterion. The relative weighting reflects current market conditions and illustrates the associated importance of each criterion according to Frost & Sullivan. Fundamentally, each DSM is distinct for each market and Award category. The DSM allows our research and consulting teams to objectively analyze each company's performance on each criterion relative to its top competitors and assign performance ratings on that basis. The DSM follows a 10-point scale that allows for nuances in performance evaluation; ratings guidelines are shown in Chart 1.