Book a demo

Biocides for Industrial Water Systems Patents: Top Filers 2026

Biocides for Industrial Water Systems Patents: Top Filers 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/biocides-for-industrial-water-systems-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Water Treatment Chemicals
Biocides for Industrial Water Systems: Patents, Leaders and Filing Trends
  • 56.5% of all filing sits with five companies. Top 5 combined account for 590 of the 1,044 records in scope, a concentration that makes freedom-to-operate checks against a handful of portfolios more useful than a broad landscape scan.
  • Filing has fallen sharply since the 2018 peak. From 80 records in the peak year, filing moved from 36 in 2021 to 8 in 2024, a -78% swing over that span — though 2025 onward is still filling in as publications lag behind filing.
  • Dual-class claims dominate: biocide activity plus water treatment. A01N (57.9%) and C02F (55.9%) co-occur on the majority of records, meaning most granted claims already tie microbial activity to a water-treatment application rather than either alone.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
1,044
Published Records
57%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-78%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (36 records) with 2024 (8) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 1,044 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview

What this landscape covers

Biocides for industrial water systems sit at the intersection of microbiology and process engineering: oxidizing agents like chlorine and bromine compounds, non-oxidizing organics, and combination chemistries such as peracetic acid blends, all deployed to control biofilm, Legionella and fouling in cooling towers, pulp mills and closed-loop systems. The dataset covers 1,044 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, indexed where claims reference oxidizing or non-oxidizing biocide chemistry together with control mechanisms such as biofilm control, halogen stabilizers, contact time or resistance development.

The claims in this space rarely stop at the active ingredient. Most documents pair a biocide chemistry claim with a water-treatment or corrosion-control application claim, which is why the IPC composition below shows heavy overlap between A01N and C02F rather than either class standing alone.

Filing concentration and technology composition, 2015–2026
  1. 1ECOLAB USA INC178
  2. 2KEMIRA OY153
  3. 3NALCO CO143
  4. 4CLEAN CHEM INC61
  5. 5A Y LABORATORIES LTD55
  6. 6ALBEMARLE CORP54
  7. 7SOLENIS TECHNOLOGIES LP37
  8. 8SOLENIS TECHNOLOGIES CAYMAN LP36
  9. 9GREAT LAKES CHEMICAL CORPORATION29
  10. 10BROMINE COMPOUNDS24
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 1,044-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.

Filing rose to a 2018 peak, then contracted

Filing climbed to 80 records in 2018 before declining; the 2021-to-2024 window alone shows a drop from 36 to 8 records, a -78% move. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirmation the field is still shrinking at that rate.

Filing rose to a 2018 peak, then contracted020406080482017802018201920202021202220232024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Claims cluster in biocide and water-treatment classes

A01N (biocides/agrochemicals) and C02F (water and wastewater treatment) each appear on more than half of all records — 57.9% and 55.9% respectively — confirming that most filings claim a biocide chemistry tied to a treatment application. A61L, A01P and the pulp-specific D21C/D21H classes are each present on a tenth or more of records, pointing to sterilisation, pesticide-activity and paper-industry applications as secondary but non-trivial claim territory.

Claims cluster in biocide and water-treatment classesA01N · Biocides / agrochemicals60457.9%C02F · Water & wastewater treatment58455.9%A61L · Sterilising & disinfecting14714.1%A01P · Pesticide activity13212.6%D21C · Pulp production & treatment12612.1%D21H · Pulp & paper compositions10410.0%C23F · Corrosion & metal removal757.2%C07C · Acyclic & carbocyclic compounds726.9%Other71168.1%

Shares are the percentage of the 1,044 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about biocides for industrial water systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Prior Art

The most-cited records defining this space

Representative Filing
ZA200007545B2001-11-28

ZA200007545B — Method and composition for inhibiting growth of microorganisms including peracetic acid and a non-oxidizing biocide

NALCO CHEMICAL COMPANY

Filed by Nalco Chemical Company, this record claims a combination treatment using peracetic acid alongside a non-oxidizing biocide to inhibit microbial growth in industrial water systems. It sits in the same claim family as two of the most-cited records in the dataset, both built around peracetic acid combined with a second biocide.Representative of the peracetic-acid combination approach that dominates the most-cited prior art in this dataset.

View full record
Highest-cited patents in the dataset
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US5494588AMethod and composition for inhibiting growth of microorganisms including peracetic acid and a second organic …173
2US5785867AMethod and composition for inhibiting growth of microorganisms including peracetic acid and a non-oxidizing b…156
3US20100160449A1Peracetic Acid Oil-Field Biocide and Method146
4US5069286AMethod for prevention of well fouling137
5US6068012APerformance-based control system122
6US5658467AMethod and composition for inhibiting growth of microorganisms including peracetic acid and a non-oxidizing b…117
7US20160068417A1Systems and method of water treatment utilizing reactive oxygen species and applications thereof110
8US6007726AStable oxidizing bromine formulations, methods of manufacture thereof and methods of use for microbiofouling …106
9WO1996014092A1Synergistic biocidal combinations94
10US20100059226A1Method of Delivering Frac Fluid and Additives78

Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.

Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis

 
Where to run it
Fastest

Eureka on the web

When you want the answer in the next five minutes.

The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.

Run your analysis now →
For builders

MCP server & REST API

When it has to run inside your own pipeline.

Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.

Browse MCP servers →
Analysis

What the data means for filing strategy

Three findings that shape where new claims can realistically land, and where the risk of running into blocking prior art is highest.

Concentration
56.5% / 5 companies
share of 1,044 records

Freedom-to-operate work should start narrow

With the top five assignees holding 590 of 1,044 records (56.5%), a broad landscape scan is less useful than a focused clearance against those portfolios. The top ten extend that to 73.8%, so the remaining ranked companies each hold a comparatively small slice.

Top 10 combined: 770 of 1,044 records
Filing momentum
-78% (2021→2024)
complete-year filing change

Peak filing has passed, but the tail is still active

Filing peaked at 80 records in 2018 and has fallen through the last complete reporting window, with 2021's 36 records dropping to 8 by 2024. That contraction likely reflects consolidation of claim space by established players rather than declining commercial interest in the underlying chemistry.

Peak year: 2018 at 80 records
Claim overlap
57.9% + 55.9%
A01N and C02F co-occurrence

Combination claims are the norm, not the exception

The two leading IPC subclasses, A01N and C02F, each cover more than half of all records, and because a record can carry multiple classes, the practical pattern is a biocide-activity claim bundled with a water-treatment method claim. Filing a chemistry claim in isolation, without a treatment-application tie, is now the minority approach.

A01N: 604 records · C02F: 584 records
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to biocides for industrial water systems, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Co-assignee activity is limited but concentrated
AssigneeCo-assigneeShared families
Bromine Compounds Ltd.THE RES FOUNDATION FOR THE STATE UNIV OF NEW YORK8
Kemira OyjUniversity of Copenhagen6
Solenis Technologies LPSolenis Technologies Cayman LP5
Nalco CompanyTU WEN LI3
Nalco CompanyRICE LAURA E3
Nalco CompanyLUTH ELISA M3
Nalco CompanyCOOPER ANDREW J3
Kemira OyjKOLARI MARKO2

Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pairings link a chemical producer with an academic or foundation partner — a pattern worth checking before assuming any single assignee holds a claim outright.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Competitive Landscape

Who holds the claim space, and where it thins out

The ranked leaders account for the bulk of filing, but momentum across the named leaders has slowed sharply in the most recent complete years, and several claim-adjacent branches remain lightly filed.

Leader
178 records
single largest filer

One assignee holds a clear lead

The top-ranked assignee holds 178 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 55 and the tenth-place holder at 24 — a steep drop-off that marks the boundary between the core group and the long tail.

Fifth place: 55 · Tenth place: 24
Momentum
0 in latest year
across several leaders

Recent-year filing has gone quiet at the top

Several of the most active historical filers show zero records in the latest year, with year-over-year drops of -100% for some. This is consistent with the broader 2021-to-2024 contraction rather than any single company exiting the space.

Applies to multiple ranked leaders
Collaboration
10 pairs
co-assignee pairings

Cross-filing is the exception

Co-assignee filing is rare across this dataset, with only 10 pairs identified. The strongest pairing links a bromine-chemistry producer with a state university research foundation, suggesting some core chemistry work is jointly held with academic partners rather than fully proprietary.

Strongest pair: 8 shared records
🔍
Under-claimed branches worth a closer look
Sub-areas with comparatively light filing density relative to the core biocide and water-treatment classes.
Halogen stabilizer chemistryResistance-development monitoringResidual measurement sensorsCorrosion-biocide dual claims (C23F overlap)Pulp-specific biocide formulations (D21C/D21H)
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Ecolab USA Inc.0-100%
Kemira Oyj0-100%
Nalco Company0
Clean Chem Inc.0-100%
A Y Laboratories Ltd.0
Albemarle Corporation0
Great Lakes Chemical Corporation0
Solenis Technologies LP0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next Steps

Where to take this analysis

The landscape points to where claim space is dense and where it thins out. The next step is testing a specific chemistry or application angle against the records that actually matter for it.

Run a freedom-to-operate check against the top holders

With 56.5% of records held by five companies, a targeted clearance search against those portfolios will surface real blocking risk faster than a full-field scan.

Explore assignee portfolios in Eureka →

Test a claim in the under-claimed branches

Halogen stabilizer chemistry and residual measurement sensors show comparatively light filing density relative to the core A01N/C02F overlap — a narrower opportunity worth validating.

Check white space with Eureka →

Track whether the 2021-2024 contraction continues

Because 2025 and 2026 filings are still being published, the next 12 to 18 months of data will confirm whether the -78% contraction has bottomed out or continued.

Set up filing alerts in Eureka →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Biocides for Industrial Water Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Biocides for Industrial Water Systems in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole biocides for industrial water systems corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.

Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.

Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.

Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.