CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize

Yes, but it’s quick and easy. Just click the “Solve this Challenge” button on this page and follow the instructions to complete your registration. All you need to provide is your name and email address.

If you have a question not answered in the FAQ, we recommend that you post it in the Forum where someone will respond to you. This way, others who may have the same question will be able to see it.

No, if you are a contest winner you are receiving the prize for meeting or exceeding the contest goals. 

Innovation is about making ideas happen. The American-Made Network will accelerate and sustain conductor materials innovation through a diverse and powerful network that includes national laboratories, energy incubators, facilities, and other valuable industry partners from across the U.S. who will engage, connect, mentor, and boost the efforts of CABLE Prize competitors.

See who is in the network.

If you encounter an issue when attempting to submit an entry to the challenge, you may need to contact HeroX or the Prize Administrator.

You may try to connect with HeroX using the online form which appears in the bottom right corner of your browser window, it says Leave a Message.

You may also send a message to the Prize Administrator inbox at CABLEprize@nrel.gov.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is the Prize Administrator for the American-Made Challenges. In this capacity, NREL works closely with the U.S. Department of Energy to administer the challenges, maintain the website platform, assist in building the network, and pay prize money to the winning teams.

All of your files are uploaded as part of the submission form, access this by clicking the Begin Entry button.  The submission form contains an upload option for each of the required file entries.  Only PDF files will be accepted for upload.

The three classes of materials that are the subject of the CABLE Prize all involve nanoscience and nanotechnology at different nano-length scales. Class 1—metal enhanced with nanocarbon involves the addition of carbon allotropes such as 1-dimensional carbon nanotubes (CNTs) (spacing of 0.2-0.4 nm) and two dimensional Graphene (interplanar spacing of 0.3nm) to conducting metals such as silver, copper and aluminum to enhance the conductivity above that of the base metal    Class 2—metal enhanced without nanocarbon, involves the precise control of metal and other interfaces especially in metal matrix composites at the scale of >100 nms for metal grain sizes.  Class 3—Non-metals.  For those based on enhancing conductivity with nanoparticles of metal—the relevant nano length scales are the metal atomic mono-layer (~10s nm) for the deposition of metal nanoparticle films on the polymer.   

The CABLE FY20 DOE Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer Research (SBIR/STTR) Topic released last Fall-- Topic 20 entitled “Conductivity-enhanced Materials for Affordable, Breakthrough, Leapfrog Electric and thermal applications (CABLE) Materials and Applications—supported R&D for both CABLE materials and CABLE applications.   The first CABLE subtopic (20a) was focused on transferring a technology for a type of CABLE material from Argonne National Laboratory to the marketplace.  Any awardees for 20a might also compete for the CABLE Prize.  The rest of the CABLE subtopics (20-b-h) –though they may involve materials fabrication—are for applications of CABLE materials in various products ranging from transmission line cables to electric vehicles. Any proposers for the CABLE SBIR application subtopics (20b-h) that intend to fabricate their own materials may also compete for the CABLE Prize.  In addition, any such proposers that do NOT intend to fabricate their own material for the disruptive innovations they are planning for U.S. manufacturers of cables (for grid and EVs), motors, generators, and renewable power technologies are strongly encouraged to partner with CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize competitors.  The timing of the Prize is set so that CABLE Prize winners receive their government funding at about the same time that CABLE SBIR awardees grants begin.

The interrelationships of the CABLE Prize, the DOE Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) FY 2021 Phase I Release 2 CABLE Topic, and the CABLE workshop are outlined and updated at the overall CABLE Big Idea website (cable-bigidea.anl.gov).

Building a clean energy economy and addressing the climate crisis is a top priority of the Biden Administration. This Prize will advance the Biden Administration’s goals to achieve carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035 and “deliver an equitable, clean energy future, and put the United States on a path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050” to the benefit of all Americans^[1].

This prize will push frontiers of science and engineering and drive American innovation for materials that can lead to the deployment of clean energy technology that is critical for climate protection. It also will catalyze clean energy jobs through the research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D) done by Prize competitors. 

In addition to their benefits for clean energy technologies, conductivity-enhanced materials can help deliver a clean energy future by enabling the grid expansion needed to deliver affordable, cleaner, lower-impact electricity that ensures environmental justice and inclusion of disadvantaged communities. The competitors’ activities supported under this Prize will enhance the government-wide approach to the climate crisis by lowering the costs of conductors to advance the goals of carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035 and industrial electrification to achieve net zero GHG emissions by 2050.

^[1]  Executive Order 14008, “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,” January 27, 2021.

It is the policy of the Biden Administration that:

[T]he Federal Government should pursue a comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality. Affirmatively advancing equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity is the responsibility of the whole of our Government. Because advancing equity requires a systematic approach to embedding fairness in decision-making processes, executive departments and agencies (agencies) must recognize and work to redress inequities in their policies and programs that serve as barriers to equal opportunity.  By advancing equity across the Federal Government, we can create opportunities for the improvement of communities that have been historically underserved, which benefits everyone^[1].

As part of this whole of government approach, this Prize seeks to encourage the participation of disadvantaged communities and underrepresented groups. As recognized in section 305 of the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act of 2017, Public Law 114-329:

"(1) [I]t is critical to our Nation’s economic leadership and global competitiveness that the United States educate, train, and retain more scientists, engineers, and computer scientists; (2) there is currently a disconnect between the availability of and growing demand for STEM-skilled workers; (3) historically, underrepresented populations are the largest untapped STEM talent pools in the United States; and (4) given the shifting demographic landscape, the United States should encourage full participation of individuals from underrepresented populations in STEM fields."

Competitors are highly encouraged to include individuals from groups historically underrepresented^[2] in STEM on their teams^[3].  As part of the Prize application, competitors are required to describe how diversity and inclusion objectives will be incorporated in the project. Specifically, competitors are required to submit a Diversity and Inclusion Plan that describes the actions the competitor will take to foster a welcoming and inclusive environment, support people from underrepresented groups in STEM, and encourage the inclusion of individuals from these groups in the project; and the extent to which the project activities will be located in or benefit disadvantaged communities. The plan should include SMART milestones supported by metrics to measure the success of the proposed actions.

Further, Minority Serving Institutions, Minority Business Enterprises, Minority Owned Businesses, Woman Owned Businesses, or entities located in a disadvantaged community^[4] that meet the eligibility requirements (See Section 6 below) are encouraged to apply. As described in section III.13, the Selection Official may consider the inclusion of these types of entities as part of the selection decision.

^[1] Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government” (Jan. 20, 2021).

^[2] Historically, minorities and women have been vastly underrepresented in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) fields that drive the energy sector. In the U.S., Hispanics, African Americans and American Indians make up 24 percent of the overall workforce, yet only account for 9 percent of the country’s science and engineering workforce. DOE seeks to reverse this troubling trend by working to inspire underrepresented Americans to pursue careers in energy and supporting their advancement into leadership positions. https://www.energy.gov/articles/introducing-minorities-energy-initiative.

^[3]  As recognized in section 305 of the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act of 2017, Public Law 114-329. 

^[4]  DOE defines “disadvantaged communities” to be areas that most suffer from a combination of economic, health, and environmental burdens, such as, poverty, high unemployment, air and water pollution, presence of hazardous wastes as well as high incidence of asthma and heart disease. Example include, but are not limited to: economically distressed communities identified by the Internal Revenue Service as Qualified Opportunity Zones; communities identified as disadvantaged communities by their respective States; communities identified on the Index of Deep Disadvantage referenced at https://news.umich.edu/new-index-ranks-americas-100-most-disadvantaged-communities/, and communities that otherwise meet the DOE definition of a disadvantaged community.

Additional FAQ answers related to the Stage 1 Modification can be found under the resources tab . 

Answer (A): Because of the importance of testing in Stage 2, from November 2021 to January
2022 and through the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL, the Prize Administrator),
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a request for information (RFI) on proposed
specific testing requirements, which also sought input on other aspects of the Stage 2 contests,
such as the inclusion of superconductors. See question Q17, Q18, and Q19 below for additional
information.

Key results of the RFI included:
• Superconductors and non-superconductors may be fairly compared if a “room-
temperature-equivalent” factor was developed for superconductors
• While some goals involving ratios of nonconductivity-related properties or
percentages above a baseline were suggested for testing and had strong
proponents, other respondents identified problematic aspects of some of these
candidate properties (e.g., ability of ratio-type goals to be manipulated in scoring
systems) and encouraged DOE to maintain absolute rather than relative goals.
• While a key focus for new materials should be on large markets, a good strategy
supports competitors whose materials could be competitive in early premium
markets, provided these markets lead to more widespread markets.
• Semiquantative factors, such as future learning-curve cost reductions, might be
reasonable for competitors to put forward in their technical narrative as part of
the description of their manufacturing process if deployed at industrial scale.
• Affordability must be reinterpreted because it is implausible, if not impossible, to
take a base conductor, such as copper or aluminum, alter it (like add nanocarbons
or process it in a new way) and have the resulting material be cheaper than the
base material. Hence, affordability metrics should focus on the long-term (>10-
year) life cycle economic competitiveness of the material compared with existing
conductors in major markets.

As a result of RFI input, DOE’s Advanced Manufacturing Office and the Prize Administration
team made the following changes to the Stage 2 rules relative to the Stage 2 rules described in
Stage 1. The team:
• Updated the Stage 2 material sample size testing requirements (see Section 5,
Sample Testing of the official rules) to be dimensional rather that weight-based
with separate requirements for non-superconductors and superconductors.

• Established specific data- and metric-calculation requirements for the test sample
and additional guidance about describing the material in the form it would take if
deployed at industrial scale and its economic competitiveness 10 years after such
deployment.
• Established a room-temperature-equivalent conductivity to enable
superconductors to compete with non-superconductors based on a testing lab
measurement of their critical temperature and critical current, as well as sample
preparation metrics and the economic competitiveness narrative that was judged
to be fair by the vast majority of RFI respondents.

The philosophy in Stage 2 was changed from an absolute contest-type of goal to that of
beating current markets. Even if a conductor didn’t meet the goal, it is still worthy of support if
it beats a major market. In addition, the Stage 1 Table 2 conductivity goals (see below table)
was relatively easy to meet with a silver conductor that would not be affordable, so bulk silver
was explicitly excluded in the new threshold version of the pure conductivity goal.

RFI respondents also pointed out that the second goal in Table 2 of the Stage 1 Rules (the
conductivity by density goal) could be made artificially high by choosing a very low-density
material that otherwise would not be a desirable conductor. Therefore, this goal was replaced
in Stage 2 (see below table) by a threshold absolute conductivity value and a requirement that
the density be the same as or less than aluminum. Similar to the first goal, in the second goal,
bulk gold was also excluded. See question #Q20 and #21 below for additional information. A
third goal was added to include a greater variety of materials.

The Prize Administrator realized that the testing aspect of Stage 2, unique to this stage, can
support participants’ narratives on the market impact of their material. This change keeps the
intent of the original goals but expands the competition to include a wider variety of potential
applications and materials that build on the benefits of Conductivity-enhanced materials for
Affordable, Breakthrough Leapfrog Electric and thermal applications (CABLE). As part of these
new thresholds, participants that set out to beat the original Stage 1 goals will be rewarded due
to the size of the markets those goals represent and due to meeting the higher thresholds for
conductivity.

In summary, in Stage 2, three new thresholds replaced the two goals in Stage 1

Similar to the Stage 1 nonmetal conductor requirement, a non-silver composite entering
Contest 1: Beat Copper! may not contain bulk silver, but it may contain silver nanoparticles as
an additive. Similarly, the nongold requirement for Contest 2: Beat Aluminum! means no bulk
gold, but gold nanoparticles may be included.

For prize partners besides NREL and DOE, protecting IP is the sole responsibility of the competitor.

For Contest 3 (Beat a Conductor System!), the competitor must provide a baseline for a widely used
conductor system that uses internationally accepted conductivity values for specified grades of
conductor and nonconductor to calculate the baseline system resistivity and conductivity. This is similar
to the values provided in figure 2 of the rules for the ASCR system in which both the conductivity of the
aluminum and the steel are included. For the competing composite, only its conductivity is measured,
regardless of whether the intent is to replace some or all of the of the nonconductor in the system. If
the latter, the system conductivity then would be calculated by the Prize Administrator based on the
same nonconductor values submitted by the competitor. The Prize Administrator would then provide
information on both the new conductor and baseline system conductivities to the judges.

The maximum score for the Stage 2 contest is 240, with 120 for the final written submission
package and 120 for the sample testing results. Below is a summary of how points are
distributed for each of the six scoring categories:

As with the Stage 1 goals, the Stage 2 goals are related to the words that comprise the CABLE
acronym (see also question Q7 above). New to this stage, points for conductivity (the “c” in
CABLE) were determined by testing rather than by technical narrative, as it was in Stage 1. It
was clear that conductivity testing results had to receive a substantial number of points.
Because of it’s importance, the CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize team decided that
testing would account for 50% of the overall available points. Having 10% of the prize points
attributed to diversity is a DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy requirement.

The team then divided the remaining 40% of the points in an iterative process informed by the
Stage 1 results and the RFI in consultation with management. For example, strict affordability
(the “a” in CABLE) was reduced in importance due to the fact that all of the conductivity
enhancements entered into Stage 1 required either or both additional materials or additional
process treatment and, therefore, because of something akin to the second law of
thermodynamics, none of them could actually cost less than the base material. Similar to how
the team divided the testing and non-testing inputs, the prize’s administrative team divided the
contribution of the testing results in an even split into manufacturability (the “m” in AMO) and
breakthrough (the “b” in CABLE) categories because they both play an important role.

Competitors are asked to, regardless of material type, submit three (3) samples* that meet
the requirements for their respective materials as follows:

* Fewer than three samples may be submitted, but entries with lower numbers of samples will
be at a disadvantage in the competition; see question #15 below.
Non-Superconducting (Metals and Nonmetals) Submissions

Sample Size Requirements:
• The sample must be a minimum of 1.5 inches (in.) long. The sample must have a circular
or rectangular cross section of at least 0.21 in. in diameter or dimensions of at least 0.18
in. wide by 0.18 in. thick.
• It must have a uniform cross section, with a cross sectional area that may not vary by
more than ±2% along the length.
• It must have a minimum electrical resistance of 20 microohms (μΩ).

Superconducting Submissions:
Sample Size Requirements
• The submission must be a circular or square sample, with one face of film5 square
millimeters or less in area.

You may send samples to the approved testing laboratory between Sept. 1, 2022, and Oct. 17,
2022. Early sample submission is highly encouraged because sample submissions postmarked
after the deadline of Oct. 17, 2022, will not be accepted

The approved testing laboratory for non-superconductors and for superconductors is NTS
and the Materials Science Division at Argonne National Laboratory, respectively. These testing
laboratories are required to ensure fairness and comparability across all submissions.

Competitors must submit a Stage 2 registration form (go to main HeroX page and click on "accept challenge" or "Begin entry" button to access registration form. Shipping addresses will be sent to eligible competitors who submit an entry form. 

The CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize will provide a testing stipend to all Stage 2
competitors, regardless of whether they won Stage 1 or not if they register in advance. Teams
who wish to take advantage of the Stage 2 testing stipend must submit a registration form via
HeroX no later than Aug. 25, 2022, at 5 p.m. ET. This stipend will cover the cost of conductivity
testing three samples of competitors’ conductivity-enhanced material at the approved CABLE laboratory. 

A: Yes. For both types of samples, results are anticipated to be provided to competitors via the
Prize Administrator within approximately 1 month following the sample submission deadline of
Oct. 17, 2022. See also question #32.

If any of samples are deemed untestable by the testing laboratory, competitors may submit
substitute samples at no charge. If, for any reason, competitors would like to test additional
samples, those tests must be self-funded. The CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize will only
pay for the testing of three samples per registered eligible competitor (i.e., met the HeroX
registration deadline and overall prize eligibility, see Section 2.9 in the official rules).

If any of samples are deemed untestable by the testing laboratory, competitors may submit
substitute samples at no charge. If, for any reason, competitors would like to test additional
samples, those tests must be self-funded. The CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize will only
pay for the testing of three samples per registered eligible competitor (i.e., met the HeroX
registration deadline and overall prize eligibility, see Section 2.9 in the official rules).

Yes. Samples will be returned to competitors. Return shipping is paid for by the CABLE
Conductor Manufacturing Prize.

There are two reasons the prize requires three samples: 1) in case one or more samples is
damaged or otherwise not able to be measured and 2) to reduce the statistical uncertainty in
the measurement. Because of this, it is acceptable to submit fewer than three samples, but the
statistical error associated with the measurement will be larger with fewer samples, and in
cases where two competitors’ sample(s) have similar values, the value with a lower error will
score higher points.

The Prize Administrator recognizes that many applications use materials that are in the form
of very thin strands of wire that are twisted together to create cables. However, because
conductivity (in megasiemens per meter) is geometry dependent, allowing samples comprising
twisted strands would complicate the requirements for fair comparisons among conductors.
The larger the sample, the more accurate the conductivity measurement, so samples that are
slightly larger than the minimum are acceptable, but samples that are smaller are not; that’s
why it’s a minimum. Samples that are significantly larger than the minimum in any dimension
may be machined down to fit the testing apparatus and for testing uniformity.

The testing organizations will share the results of the testing for each entry with the Prize
Administration team (DOE and NREL), the Stage 2 Expert Review team, and individual
competitors and will not otherwise disclose them. Competitors are free to publish their own testing results. DOE and NREL reserve the right to publish metadata that does not personally identify competitors (i.e., if there are sufficient statistics in various categories) in peer-reviewed or other publications.

Yes. Stage 2 is open to new competitors regardless of their participation in Stage 1. Please
note, however, that only Stage 2 winners may compete in Stage 3.

To compete in Stage 2, competitors will need to: 1) submit a Stage 2 registration form by 5 p.m.
ET on Aug. 25, 2022 (noting that, if competitors miss this deadline, they can still compete but
will need to self-fund the required testing); 2) submit three sample materials to the approved
CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize testing laboratory by Oct. 17, 2022; and 3) submit a final
Stage 2 submission package by 5 p.m. ET on Dec. 1, 2022.

It is recommended (but not required) that competitors also attend or view the Stage 2
Informational Webinar (held on May 17, 2022) and/or the CABLE Big Idea Workshop (July 20–
21, 2022)

The second annual CABLE Big Ideas Workshop hosted by the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy’s AMO will be held at Argonne National Laboratory near Chicago,
Illinois, and visible virtually on July 20–21, 2022. Like the first CABLE workshop that was held
April 7–9, 2021, this workshop will bring together the broader CABLE ecosystem to discuss
materials and applications. In addition, all presentations—as was done for the first workshop—
will be posted on the CABLE website. In addition to CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize
competitors, the workshop will include CABLE Small Business Innovation Research and Small
Business Technology Transfer program competitors and awardees, CABLE Lab seedling
awardees, past judges and reviewers, CABLE subject-matter experts, and interested parties
from industry, government, academia, finance, nonprofits and the general public.
 

Register here: https://web.cvent.com/event/8b860deb-a78b-465a-abb1-
d3d1970ee974/summary.

Due to COVID restrictions, in-person attendance is limited but still available as of July 4, 2022. Virtual attendance is unlimited. 

At this second workshop, CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize competitors will have a specific opportunity on the first day of the workshop to showcase their innovations to workshop participants and meet with researchers from national laboratories who can provide voucher services in Stage 3. See the agenda for details and contact  to reserve a spot.

While attendance at the CABLE Big Ideas Workshop is strongly encouraged for all Stage 2 competitors, it is not required. After the workshop, similar to the first CABLE workshop, presentations and additional references will be posted at cable-bigidea.anl.gov with updates on CABLE Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer program awards and other funding opportunities.

The informational webinar provided an overview of what is required for competitor submission, the voucher process, sample testing, how entries are scored, and how competitors can receive support from American-Made Challenges network connectors to help execute their plan. 

The webinar was held on May 17, 2022, via Zoom. To see the recording, visit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EffwMn6KxeM 

Prize vouchers allow winners from the Stage 2 contest to access tools, equipment, and expertise at national laboratories and approved organizations and facilities, in turn supporting the development, testing, and validation of their innovative solutions. Stage 2 contest winners will each receive a $100,000 voucher.

In Stage 2, competitors are asked to identify a technical assistance voucher partner within either the American-Made Network or at a DOE national laboratory. As part of their Stage 2 submission, competitors are asked to complete a voucher work slide to provide a high-level summary of the proposed work and deliverables should they win Stage 2. 

The CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize team will provide competitors with opportunities to engage with national lab researchers during Stage 2. 

More details on the CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize vouchers can be found in the Voucher Guidelines (posted June 2022) 

Competitors are required to work with either an approved member of the American-Made Network or DOE national laboratory. Any interested organization not currently a part of the American-Made Network can apply to be added to the list of approved organizations at https://americanmadechallenges.org/network.

Voucher capabilities at National Kabs and within the AMC Network will be posted to HeroX in the near future. 

On August 18, the CABLE Prize will hold a virtual networking event where Stage 2 CABLE Prize teams can network 1:1 with National Laboratory Researchers to ask questions and scope work their Stage 2 Voucher Work Slide which is due with their Stage 2 submission on December 1, 2022. See questions Q17 – Q19 for more information on Vouchers. 

The CABLE Conductor Manufacturing Prize is currently seeking co-sponsors for Stage 2 and Stage 3. Co-sponsors help in a variety of ways, including by providing both in-kind and financial support for the prize and its competitors. 

If you are interested in learning more, please email the Prize Administrator at 

The Prize Administrator would appreciate help with outreach. Please feel free to forward any information about this prize to your network or email the team at .

DOE and NREL do not have rights to any underlying inventions discussed in competitors’ submission materials or developed while competing in this prize. See Appendix 1 in the official rules for more information regarding submission rights.   

For prize partners besides NREL and DOE, protecting IP is the sole responsibility of the competitor.