Solid Oxide Electrolyzer Durability Patents: Leaders & Gaps 2026
- Thin, concentrated field. just 23 families sit at the intersection of SOEC and durability-specific claim language, with filings peaking at 6 in 2023 and no clear upward trend since.
- Fuel-cell IPC codes dominate. H01M appears in 17 of 23 records versus 14 for core electrolytic-production code C25B, showing durability claims are being anchored in fuel-cell-side classification more than electrolysis-side.
- Filing is split, not centralized. EPO and US receiving offices each carry 9 records with no single office dominant, and co-assignee pairing is limited to a handful of individual-inventor clusters rather than corporate teams.
What this landscape covers
This dataset isolates patent families where solid oxide electrolyzer or solid oxide electrolysis claim language overlaps with durability-specific terms: redox cycling, thermal cycling, sulfur tolerance and long-term stability. It is a narrow cut of a broader SOEC filing base, restricted further by IPC codes covering electrolytic production (C25B9/23, C25B11) and fuel-cell hardware (H01M8/12). The result is 23 families spanning 2015 through the current filing year.
Because the query combines a technology term with durability-specific claim language, the set skews toward records where degradation mechanisms are named explicitly in the claims or title rather than implied by materials choice. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent filing year is understated in any trend read here.
Trend and technology composition
Filing volume in this durability-specific slice has stayed low and uneven rather than building toward a clear inflection point.
A flat trajectory with one peak year
Filings ran at zero in 2017, rose gradually, and peaked at 6 in 2023. The 2022 midpoint sits at just 1 record, meaning most of the activity in this narrow durability niche is recent and thin rather than an established growth curve. Read the tail end of the trend cautiously given publication lag.
Fuel-cell hardware codes outweigh core electrolysis codes
H01M (batteries, cells and fuel cells) appears in 17 of 23 records, ahead of C25B (electrolytic production of compounds) at 14. Ceramics code C04B appears in 4 records, reflecting electrode and electrolyte material claims, while single appearances in C01F, C03C and C09D point to isolated coating and compound-composition approaches rather than an established sub-cluster.
Shares are the percentage of the 23 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Solid Oxide Electrolyzer Environmental Durability with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about solid oxide electrolyzer environmental durability and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA recent filing anchoring the durability claim space
Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell, Method for Manufacturing Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell, Solid Oxide Electrolysis Module, Electrochemical Device, and Energy System
Provided is a solid oxide electrolysis cell in which the electrode layer thereof is prevented from peeling, and that has excellent strength (reliability), durability, and performance. A solid oxide electrolysis cell E includes at least a first electrode layer, a second electrode layer, and an electrolyte layer disposed between them, wherein the first electrode layer has at least a plurality of pores each having an area of 0.75 μm² or more in a vertical cross section thereof.Filed by Osaka Gas Co., Ltd., published 2025-06-26.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2017116307A1 | A promising co- electrolyzer for the direct use of FLUE gas from power plant | 20 |
| 2 | US20110062017A1 | Efficient reversible electrodes for solid oxide electrolyzer cells | 17 |
| 3 | US20210098796A1 | Fuel cell and electrolyzer hotbox module using conductive zirconia stacks | 11 |
| 4 | US20230110742A1 | Metal Support, Electrochemical Element, Electrochemical Module, Electrochemical Device, Energy System, Solid … | 7 |
| 5 | US8354011B2 | Efficient reversible electrodes for solid oxide electrolyzer cells | 6 |
| 6 | JP2015532253A | 封止剤として使用するためのガラス組成物 | 4 |
Citation counts favor older records in a searched corpus; treat them as a signal of influence within this set, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (6 of 6 rows); clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
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 →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 →What the filing pattern signals
Three things stand out once the durability-specific claim language is isolated from the broader SOEC corpus.
Durability claims are filed as fuel-cell hardware, not electrolysis chemistry
The dominance of H01M over C25B suggests that patentees are protecting reversible cell hardware and stack architecture that happens to run in electrolysis mode, rather than filing durability claims tied specifically to electrolytic production processes. Reversible solid oxide cell (RSOC) hardware, cited among the top records here, sits at exactly this junction.
Filing has not built into a growth curve
A single peak year followed by no clear trajectory, and a midpoint of just 1 filing in 2022, indicates this remains an experimental or defensive filing pattern rather than a race to claim territory. New entrants can still establish position without competing against a wall of recent art.
No dominant corporate cluster has formed
The strongest co-filing links in this set are between individual named inventors rather than large corporate R&D teams, and recent-year momentum for every tracked assignee sits at zero. That points to a field where institutional players like Osaka Gas, CoorsTek, and Washington State University hold isolated filings rather than sustained programs.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to solid oxide electrolyzer environmental durability, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| ZHAO FENG | ELANGOVAN S | 3 |
| ZHAO FENG | HARTVIGSEN JOSEPH J | 2 |
| ELANGOVAN S | HARTVIGSEN JOSEPH J | 2 |
| CoorsTek, Inc. | ZHAO FENG | 1 |
| CoorsTek, Inc. | HARTVIGSEN JOSEPH | 1 |
| CoorsTek, Inc. | ELANGOVAN S | 1 |
| ZHAO FENG | HARTVIGSEN JOSEPH | 1 |
| ELANGOVAN S | HARTVIGSEN JOSEPH | 1 |
The three strongest co-assignee pairs in this dataset connect named individual inventors, not company R&D units — a sign that some of the durability IP here originated in academic or small-team settings before any commercial assignee picked it up.
Who holds durability claims, and where the gaps sit
With 23 families total and zero recent-year momentum recorded for every tracked assignee, this is not a field with an active leader defending fresh territory — it is a scattered set of prior filings available to build around.
Osaka Gas and CoorsTek hold isolated positions
Osaka Gas's representative filing on electrode pore geometry and CoorsTek's ceramics-side work both sit in this set, but neither shows recent-year filing activity, suggesting durability-specific claims have not become a sustained corporate priority even where cell manufacturing programs continue elsewhere.
University-linked filings appear but do not repeat
Washington State University appears among tracked assignees with no recent-year filings, consistent with single-project rather than program-level patenting in this durability niche.
Zhao Feng, Elangovan S and Hartvigsen anchor the densest cluster
These three names form the tightest citation and co-filing links in the set, tied to reversible electrode work that underlies several of the most-cited records. Their filings predate the 2023 peak and represent foundational rather than current claim territory.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Osaka Gas Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| CoorsTek, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Washington State University | 0 | — |
| ZHAO FENG | 0 | — |
| ELANGOVAN S | 0 | — |
| HARTVIGSEN JOSEPH J | 0 | — |
| Korea Institute of Energy Research | 0 | — |
| Phillips 66 Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The filing pattern here raises questions a single landscape table cannot answer on its own.
Check freedom to operate on specific claim elements
The under-claimed sub-areas identified here — sealant chemistries, rare-earth stabilised electrolytes, protective coatings — need claim-by-claim review before a new filing, not just a subclass count.
Explore claim-level search in EurekaTrack whether momentum resumes post-2023
With every tracked assignee at zero in the latest year and publication lag understating recent activity, a re-run of this search in 6-12 months will show whether the 2023 peak was a one-off or the start of a new filing wave.
Set up monitoring in EurekaMap the individual inventors to current employers
The Zhao Feng / Elangovan S / Hartvigsen cluster predates the recent peak; confirming where these inventors filed next indicates whether their reversible-electrode work has been picked up by an active corporate program.
Trace inventor moves in EurekaCommon questions on SOEC durability patents
This dataset identifies 23 patent families that combine solid oxide electrolyzer or electrolysis claim language with durability-specific terms such as redox cycling, thermal cycling, sulfur tolerance or long-term stability. That is a narrow slice of the much larger overall SOEC filing base, since most SOEC patents do not name a degradation mechanism explicitly in the claims or title. Filing peaked at 6 records in 2023, and activity has not built into a sustained upward trend since.
No single company shows sustained recent filing in this specific niche: every tracked assignee, including Osaka Gas, CoorsTek and Washington State University, records zero filings in the latest tracked year. Osaka Gas's 2025 filing on electrode pore geometry is the most recent representative record in the set. The strongest filing links overall belong to a cluster of individual inventors — Zhao Feng, Elangovan S and Hartvigsen Joseph J — tied to earlier reversible-electrode patents rather than current corporate programs.
Redox cycling durability concerns a cell's ability to withstand repeated oxidation-reduction state changes at the electrode, typically from load or gas-supply interruptions, without mechanical degradation. Thermal cycling durability concerns tolerance to repeated heating and cooling, which stresses seals, interconnects and layer adhesion through differential expansion. Both terms appear in this dataset's search criteria, and patents addressing either mechanism can also touch sulfur tolerance or general long-term stability claims, so the categories overlap in practice rather than sitting in separate claim silos.
H01M (batteries, cells and fuel cells) appears in 17 of the 23 records, ahead of C25B (electrolytic production of compounds) at 14. This reflects how reversible solid oxide cell hardware is classified: much of the durability-relevant hardware, such as stack architecture and electrode materials, is filed and classified as fuel-cell technology even when the claims cover electrolysis operation. A search limited only to C25B codes would therefore miss a meaningful share of durability-relevant art.
The IPC composition shows single-digit or single-record representation in several adjacent branches: rare-earth and alkaline-earth compound claims (C01F), glass and enamel sealant compositions (C03C), and protective coating chemistries (C09D) each appear only once or twice in this 23-family set. Ceramics-related claims (C04B) appear four times, suggesting electrode and electrolyte materials get more attention than sealants and coatings. These thinner branches are candidates for new filings, though a claim-level freedom-to-operate check is needed before relying on subclass counts alone.
Research Solid Oxide Electrolyzer Environmental Durability in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole solid oxide electrolyzer environmental durability corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
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.