Back to news

April 7, 2022 | Local, Land

OPPORTUNITY: US Army xTech International - Energy Water Synthetic Biology - DEADLINE APRIL 15TH

The Trade Commissioner Service would like to make industry aware of the US Army's xTechInternational Competition, which provides a forum for eligible international small businesses to engage with the Army, earn prize money and investigate funding opportunities to tackle Army challenges across three key technology areas: Energy; Water; and Synthetic Biology.

Responses are due by APRIL 15, 2022 in the form of a 3 page white paper and option 3 minute video.

See full details on the xTech website here: https://www.arl.army.mil/xtechsearch/competitions/xtechinternational.html

The registration/submission page may be found here: https://usg.valideval.com/teams/xtech_International/signup

Problem Statements

· Topic 1: Electric Power and Energy Technologies

o Challenge: As new and future Army systems are planned for expeditionary operations; developers are focusing on electric power to decrease the reliance on fossil fuels and to alleviate supply line issues. The DoD is seeking technologies to facilitate future electric systems that can operate in varied conditions. Of particular interest are the following energy technologies for expeditionary operations:

§ Critical Infrastructure energy technologies to support high demand for electric power on the battlefield, such as tactical battlefield recharging capability for onboard vehicle batteries.

§ High Energy Battery Technology, greater than 400Wh/kg, to keep up with the demand for high density energy storage with long life cycle and fast charging capabilities (>=4C rate with limited degradation), across a wide operational temperature range (-46 to +71 Celsius, per MIL-PRF-32565).

§ Technologies for Improving Battery Safety that can reduce safety risks posed by thermal runaway of high energy density battery systems.

§ Open-Source Lithium ion 6T Battery Management System (BMS) & Case design that meets Army standards, which the Army can then provide to battery manufacturers, to reduce battery manufacturers' challenges to developing Army compliant lithium-ion 6T batteries. This also enables the Army to swiftly adopt of new and emerging battery cell technologies in the Lithium-ion 6T space.

· Topic 2: Water Technologies

o Challenge: Expeditionary forces are operating in locations where local water sources may contain microbial, chemical, or heavy metal contamination and supply lines are unreliable to deliver timely supplies. The DoD is seeking technologies to produce potable water in real-time using a scalable solution with minimal logistical requirements, in order to support enduring operations. Of particular interest are the following water technologies for expeditionary operations:

§ Technologies for the extraction of water from atmosphere or non-traditional water sources.

§ Removal of microbiological, chemical, and heavy metals on an individual scale.

§ Real time water sensors to support individual Soldier field purification efforts by ensuring the efficacy of the water purification device in real time and identifying contaminants in indigenous water sources.

· Topic 3: SynBio Technologies

o Challenge: Synthetic biology is enabling us to better harness nature to produce leap-ahead materials that we cannot make efficiently in any other way. Cell culture methods that have been the workhorse for industrial use often require very controlled process conditions and can have various limitations on the types/complexity of product produced. We want to harness biosynthesis methods beyond that paradigm to realize more efficient on-demand production of biochemicals/biomaterials anywhere in the world or fabrication of multifunctional protective materials (e.g., self-cleaning armor with integrated sensing, eye protection, tunable RF antenna and camouflage properties), and we are interested in any advancements that have been made in characterizing novel organism capabilities and steps towards engineering them. Such novel organisms could include, but not be limited to: extremophiles or typical eukaryotes (e.g., microalgae/diatoms, insect cells). Examples of potential interest areas include:

§ Extremophile novel biochemical pathways tuned for selective synthesis, recovery, separation, and/or remediation of high value elements/materials (e.g., production of novel energetic materials; remediation of energetics; recovery and separation/processing of rare earth and other high-value elements).

§ Open cultures (instead of expensive sterile systems) that support using non-sterile nutrients by non-experts in minimal protective gear.

§ Expanding the breadth of elements that organisms can utilize to make novel materials or precursor materials that can be converted into novel materials (e.g., as is done in polymer-derived ceramics).

§ Synthesis of biohybrid/multifunctional materials, toward next generation military-grade materials/coatings that cannot be affordably/feasibly fabricated in any other way [e.g., eye and sensor protection, camouflaging or concealing materials, complex multifunctional fiber materials (integrated strength/sensing/RF emission/decontamination/optical properties)]; novel energetic material production with micro/nanopackaging; structural or adhesive materials; or reinforced materials with enhanced degradation/erosion characteristics.

§ Human performance applications such as living sensors for harsh environments, encapsulated skin-biotics for UV/nuclear radiation protection, responsive textile-attached antimicrobials

Eligibility

The entities allowed to participate in this competition must be international SME businesses. SME businesses are defined as those with <250 staff headcount, and within turn-over thresholds per the European Commission (EC) definition of SME. Participating entities must have or be able to obtain a CAGE code if selected to advance in the competition. (For assistance in obtaining a CAGE code, please contact Trade Commissioner Bobby Tate – Robert.tate@international.gc.ca)

How to enter

All eligible entities shall submit a short 3-page concept white paper and an optional accompanying 3-minute video outlining their potential impact/revolutionary for DoD, the technology and concept viability and commercialization and potential. Each concept white paper and accompanying video, if included, will be reviewed by DoD and international stakeholders including user, program acquisition, and research and development subject matter experts.

Additional questions, contact the xTech Program Office: usarmy.pentagon.hqda-asa-alt.mbx.xtechsearch@army.mil

On the same subject

  • Matt Gurney: Supporting local industry shouldn't be the first consideration in military procurement

    December 17, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Matt Gurney: Supporting local industry shouldn't be the first consideration in military procurement

    Rather than worrying about where things are built, a better question is: will Canadian soldiers be properly equipped? That's all that matters Matt Gurney Dec 16, 2020 &bull; Last Updated 22 hours ago &bull; 5 minute read It is almost a truism in Canadian public policy: We are terrible at military procurement. You hear that often. I've said it often. But it really isn't true. We only think we're terrible at military procurement because we are confused about what we're trying to do. Our military procurements are not about actually procuring equipment for the military. They're about creating jobs and catapulting huge sums of money into key ridings across the country. Once you shift your perspective and look at it that way, you realize very quickly that our military procurement system is amazing. It bats a thousand. The problem isn't with the system. We've just labelled it badly. If it were called the Domestic Defence Industry Subsidy Program instead of our military procurement system, we'd all be hailing it as a shining example of a Canadian public policy triumph. This is terrible. It has cost us the lives of our soldiers, and probably will again. But it's undeniable. Canadian politicians, Liberals and Conservatives alike, have long had the luxury of seeing defence as a cash pool, not a solemn obligation. And they sure have enjoyed that pleasure. Two recent stories by my colleague David Pugliese for the Ottawa Citizen have explored this theme: Our efforts to replace our fleet of frigates with 15 newer, more powerful ships is turning predictably complicated. The 15 new combat ships are part of a major overhaul of the Canadian fleet, which was neglected for many years and now must be modernized all at once. In February of 2019, the government chose American defence giant Lockheed Martin to produce the ships in Canada, using a British design. (How Anglosphere of us.) Companies that weren't selected to be part of the construction or fitting out of the ships are unhappy, Pugliese noted, and aren't bothering to hide it, even though they've abandoned their legal challenges. The sniping has continued, though, with spurned industry figures talking to the media about problems with the program. Jody Thomas, deputy minister of the Department of National Defence, reportedly told industry leaders to knock it off. &ldquo;There's too much noise,&rdquo; she reportedly said, adding that it was making the job of getting the new fleet built &ldquo;very difficult.&rdquo; Some of Thomas's irritation is undoubtedly the automatic hostility to scrutiny, transparency and accountability that's far too common for Canadian officials &mdash; our bureaucrats are notoriously prone to trying to keep stuff tucked neatly out of public view. But some of what Thomas said is absolutely bang-on accurate: Defence industry companies know full well that the government mainly views military procurement as a jobs-creation program, so are understandably put out to not get what they think is their fair share. Some Canadian companies have designed and developed critical communication and sensor gear for modern warships, Pugliese noted. This gear was developed with taxpayer assistance and has proven successful in service with allied fleets, but was not chosen for the new Canadian ships. And this is, the companies believe, a problem. Why aren't Canadian ships using Canadian-made gear? It's a good question, until you think about it for a moment. Then you realize that the better question is this: will the Canadian ships be properly equipped? That's it. That's all that matters. Will the new ships be capable of doing the things we need them to do? If yes, then who cares where we got the gear? And if no, well, again &mdash; then who cares where we got the gear? The important thing isn't where the comm equipment and sensors were designed and built. It's that the systems work when our ships are heading into harm's way. Assuming we have many viable options to choose from, then there are plenty of good ways of making the choice &mdash; cost, proven reliability, familiarity to Canadian crews, and, sure, even whether it was made in Canada. But supporting the local industry needs to be the last thing on the list. This stuff is essential. The lives of our sailors may depend on it working when needed. Cost matters, too, of course, because if the gear is too pricey, we won't have enough of it, but effectiveness and reliability are first. Treating military procurement as just another federal jobs-creation program is engrained in our national thinking But we talk about them last. Because we value it least. There probably is some value in preserving our ability to produce some essential military equipment here in Canada. The scramble earlier this year to equip our frontline medical workers with personal protective equipment is instructive. In a war, whether against a virus or a human enemy, you can't count on just buying your N-95 masks, or your torpedoes and missiles, from your normal suppliers. Unless Canada somehow gets itself into a shooting war without any of our allies in our corner, any time we are suddenly scrambling to arm up, our much larger allies are probably also scrambling to arm up, and they'll simply outbid us. (See again our current efforts to procure vaccines for an example of this unfolding in real time.) But we aren't at war now, and we can buy the damn ships from anyone. To the government's credit, it seems to be doing this; the pushback against the program seems mostly rooted in the government's decision to let the U.S.-British consortium chosen to build the new ships equip them as they see fit. The program may well derail at some point &mdash; this is always a safe bet with Canadian shipbuilding &mdash; but insofar as at least this part of the process goes, we're doing it partially right. Yes, we're insisting on building the ships here, but we aren't getting picky about the equipment that goes into them. That's probably wise. But that's about as far as the wisdom goes. Treating military procurement as just another federal jobs-creation program is engrained in our national thinking. It would have been good if COVID had knocked a bit of sense into us and forced us to, at long last, grow up a bit. But no dice. Oh well. Maybe next time. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-supporting-local-industry-shouldnt-be-the-first-consideration-in-military-procurement

  • Defence Minister Bill Blair to meet with Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence in Vancouver

    August 5, 2024 | Local, Land

    Defence Minister Bill Blair to meet with Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence in Vancouver

    On August 8, 2024, the Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of National Defence will welcome Richard Marles, Deputy Prime Minister of Australia and Minister for Defence, to Vancouver, British Columbia for a bilateral visit

  • High cost of living dragging down Armed Forces morale, chaplain general warns | CBC News

    October 8, 2023 | Local, Land, C4ISR

    High cost of living dragging down Armed Forces morale, chaplain general warns | CBC News

    Military chaplains are seeing an increasing number of soldiers, sailors and aircrew who — squeezed by the soaring cost of living and stuck in a system that forces them to relocate — are in financial distress and seeking assistance.

All news