To access the full written testimony, download the PDF on the left-hand sidebar.

This testimony was delivered before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy at its hearing on “The CLEAN Future Act: Driving Decarbonization of the Transportation Sector” on May 5, 2021.

Video of the testimony is available here. Michot Foss’ remarks start at the 53:09 mark.
 

Summary – Presented Testimony

• Policy and decision makers should take an approach that is not part of conventional thinking.
  • Materials — all materials, regardless of source — are the first building blocks. Materials science is dynamic. The nature of innovation is serendipitous and economic and financial risks are substantial. Both are vulnerable to underlying business conditions and tax policies.
  • Systems require extraordinary attention and support, be they for basic infrastructure or to push sophistication into essential functions like electric power grids. A country that cannot attain public acceptance of legacy components, fuels and technologies is unlikely to be one where public acceptance of new technologies and their intrusions can easily be achieved.
  • Data is in a fragile state. BEVs increasingly interact with energy, telecommunications and other systems, infrastructure and data streams. Data is intellectual property (IP), with inherent value and assorted strategies for monetization. Everything from automation in transport to road maintenance and environmental controls has the potential for solutions embedded in data. A world full of BEVs is one in which data extends well beyond terabytes, creating new demands for storage with attendant energy and sustainability considerations.
• Battery costs, risks and affordability.
  • Are contingent upon regional distribution of manufacturing platforms, associated supply chains and logistics, workforce capacity and labor costs and the assortment of contextual factors that are responsible for comparative advantages, or not, across nations and localities.
  • Large “cones of uncertainty” exist.
  • Policy makers should focus on core economic policies that support competitiveness and resilience.
  • Batteries and BEVs are materials intense. Mining and minerals processing already are a focus for ESG imperatives. Recycling can help but is a work in progress. BEV manufacturing and recycling must become “symbiotic”. A worry is that environmental regulations that affect businesses engaged with hazardous materials could throttle vital new processes and approaches. A further concern is that BEVs, batteries and other components of alternative energy will add to waste volumes much more rapidly than we can build capacity for handling end of life.
  • Commodity prices already are rising sharply. A “rush to materials” for alternative energy aspirations will threaten economic and national security, could trigger inflation or even hyperinflation, create new sources of geopolitical risks and uncertainties, undermine fragile states, lead to expansion of unsustainable industries and a host of other consequences. Expectations for minerals price increases are now baked into every trading position as well as into nearly every minerals expansion or new venture. They are not, however, baked into forecasts of battery costs.
  • Electricity prices are at least as unreliable as other commodities. Many government policies to support BEVs in other countries entail measures to soften the cost of recharging. U.S. residential costs have climbed persistently even while the key marginal fuel for power generation – natural gas – has been historically low. When it comes to expanding recharging, a distinct consumer issue is whether non-BEV owning or using customers will pay an oversize share of costs.
• Hydrocarbons and petrochemicals are vital raw materials.
  • Global oil and gas operations are leveraged by sale of petroleum and natural gas fuels, keeping costs of materials affordable.
  • Plastics are crucial for BEVs — more than half of vehicle content but only 10% of weight.
  • Advanced polymers are essential for advanced vehicles and batteries.
  • Advanced plastics recycling is underway and would benefit from more strategic thinking about supply chains and circular economies.
  • Bioplastics are under development for automotive use but availability and affordability of BEVs — any vehicle type for that matter — will continue to hinge on hydrocarbons-based materials sourced from U.S. and global oil and gas operations.
• Executive Order 14017, America’s Supply Chains, should include hydrocarbons as critical minerals; add end of life management and associated logistics. Interactions are pervasive – diverse industry participants share concerns. Supply chain preparedness and resilience would benefit from the building blocks of materials first, systems and data.
• Finally, to China’s role.
  • China dominates production of many critical and basic minerals and now also dominates trade flows, with some expanding as much as ten times 2001-2019.
  • China’s coal dominated electric power capacity is key to its battery manufacturing.
  • China also dominates trade in LIB products.
  • China’s strength in LIB manufacturing and supply chains is well documented by DOE CEMAC.
  • A “rush to materials” to counter China’s influence and secure alternative energy supply chains would exacerbate global tensions on many fronts.