[Senate Hearing 116-53]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 116-53
ELECTRIC BATTERY PRODUCTION AND WASTE: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
----------
JULY 17, 2019
----------
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
ELECTRIC BATTERY PRODUCTION AND WASTE: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
S. Hrg. 116-53
ELECTRIC BATTERY PRODUCTION AND WASTE: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 17, 2019
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
37-496 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Chairman
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware,
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia Ranking Member
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
JONI ERNST, Iowa TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
Richard M. Russell, Majority Staff Director
Mary Frances Repko, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
JULY 17, 2019
OPENING STATEMENTS
Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming...... 1
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 20
WITNESSES
Sanders, Michael, Senior Advisor, Avicenne Energy US............. 94
Prepared statement........................................... 97
Greenberger, James J., Executive Director, National Alliance for
Advanced Technology Batteries International.................... 106
Prepared statement........................................... 108
Chawan, Ajay, Associate Director, Navigant Consulting, Inc....... 115
Prepared statement........................................... 117
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Submitted by Senator Barrasso:
The Cobalt Pipeline, by Todd C. Frankel, Washington Post,
September 30, 2016......................................... 260
The rise of electric cars could leave us with a big battery
waste problem, by Joey Gardiner, The Guardian, August 10,
2017....................................................... 298
The Real Cost of Your Phone, by Rebecca Zissou, http://
upfront.scholastic.com, October 30, 2017................... 302
Comparative Study on Life Cycle CO2 Emissions from
the Production of Electric and Conventional Vehicles in
China, by Qinyu Qiao et al., Energy Procedia, 105 (2017)
3584-3595.................................................. 306
Amnesty challenges industry leaders to clean up their
batteries, http://amnesty.org, March 21, 2019.............. 318
Saving the Planet With Electric Cars Means Strangling This
Desert, by Laura Millan Lombrana, Bloomberg, June 11, 2019. 322
Letter to Senators Barrasso and Carper from the Institute of
Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc., August 2, 2019............... 332
ELECTRIC BATTERY PRODUCTION AND WASTE: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 2019
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Barrasso
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Barrasso, Carper, Inhofe, Capito, Braun,
Rounds, Sullivan, Boozman, Ernst, Cardin, Whitehouse, Merkley,
Markey, Duckworth, and Van Hollen.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Good morning. I call this hearing to
order.
The purpose of today's hearing is to evaluate the
environmental challenges and opportunities associated with
increased battery demand as well as disposal.
The global market for electric vehicles is expected to rise
in the coming years. By 2025, up to 90 percent of the global
market for lithium ion batteries will come from electric
vehicles. This increase in demand, left unaddressed, will
exacerbate current challenges associated with battery
production and waste.
Lithium ion batteries use a number of critical minerals.
They include lithium, cobalt, graphite, and rare earth elements
as well. The United States and the rest of the world have
allowed China to dominate control over the production of these
minerals. China exerts substantial control over mining
operations in countries with vast reserves, including the
Democratic Republic of the Congo and Chile.
In May, Foreign Policy published a report entitled--I will
hold it up here--Mining the Future: How China Is Set to
Dominate the Next Industrial Revolution. So I would like to
enter this report into the record, without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. The Secretary General for Amnesty
International has stated that, ``Every stage of battery life
cycle, from mineral extraction to disposal, carries human
rights and environmental risks.'' Approximately 60 percent of
the world's cobalt is currently mined in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo.
This photograph shows a child cleaning cobalt there. It is
a child in the Congo.
Jim, you take a look, I know you have been in that country.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. In Chile, lithium production is affecting
the local water supplies. The evaporation process to produce
lithium requires pumping brine into pools like the one pictured
here.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. China also has a hold on battery
manufacturing. Chinese battery production also has significant
environmental impacts. As we all know, China's environmental
regulations are not on a par with ours.
China uses less advanced manufacturing techniques than the
United States. One study found that producing a lithium ion
battery in China emits about three times as much carbon dioxide
as producing the battery in the United States.
Environmental challenges continue once a battery reaches
the end of its life. Lithium ion batteries are recycled at a
rate of less than 5 percent. Between 2018 and 2030, over 11
million tons of spent lithium ion batteries will be discarded
across the world.
Now is the time for this Committee to evaluate the looming
waste challenge as well as the opportunity that it presents. I
say opportunity, because we have had past successes with other
types of battery recycling in this country. About 99 percent of
lead acid batteries from cars and trucks are recycled today--99
percent.
In the case of lithium ion batteries, recycling could have
multiple benefits. First, it could cut down on the waste that
goes into landfills, and in landfills, if not carefully
managed, lithium ion batteries pose fire risks as well as
electrocution risks.
Recycling also could cut down on emissions and other
environmental impacts. From its creation to its disposal, an
electric vehicle can have higher environmental impacts in some
areas than a standard automobile. For example, an electric
vehicle over its full life scale consumes more water resources
than your average car. Emissions of sulfur oxides are also
higher.
In addition to enhancing environmental and sustainability
goals, recycling can also address broader economic and security
risks. If we recycle more, we can rely less on overseas
production of the raw materials. Recycling should be part of a
broader discussion that also includes more raw material
production and battery manufacturing here in the United States.
If the pace of electric vehicle demand continues, recycling
alone will not be enough. My home State of Wyoming contains
substantial reserves of critical minerals, including rare earth
elements.
I am a co-sponsor of S. 1317, the American Mineral Security
Act, which is sponsored by the Energy and Natural Resources
Committee, with Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Manchin,
so it is bipartisan. That bill passed the committee yesterday.
The bill recognizes we must improve the permitting process to
produce more critical minerals in the United States.
Before we move to our witnesses, I would like to turn to my
friend, colleague, and Ranking Member, Senator Carper, for his
remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Again to our witnesses, welcome.
There is a very young son, 10-year-old son sitting behind
one of our witnesses, who is there to keep an eye on his dad.
We are going to watch and see if his lips move when you speak.
We will see how that goes.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. I also would like to ask a couple of
unanimous consent requests to submit for the record, three
documents. One is by McKinsey and Company that highlights the
untapped opportunities of recycling electric vehicle batteries
to meet our future electric vehicle battery mineral needs. The
second is a recent article by OilPrice.com. That article
highlights the tens of millions of dollars being invested by
folks like Toyota, Tesla, and some U.S. startup companies in
more sustainable batteries.
And the third is a study by the Institute for Sustainable
Futures, which found policies that encourage recycling and
responsible electric battery sourcing can promote global
environmental stewardship and help address the human rights
concerns raised by our Chairman, with battery recycling being
the most important policy.
I would ask unanimous consent to submit those.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. I would also add that I appreciate very
much our Chairman's concern for human rights in the context of
mining conduct overseas. As we know, issues related to labor
practices and the treatment of workers go well beyond just the
extraction of minerals currently needed to produce electric
vehicle batteries. I am confident that our Chairman's
comments--and I hope mine as well--mean that we will join
together in crafting, with our colleagues, and passing
legislation that makes major investments in all electric waste
recycling infrastructure to recover critical minerals, but also
provide real investments in research, development, and
deployment of the next generation batteries that don't need any
of the mined materials that are causing the concern that he has
spoken to.
As the Chairman knows, my colleagues may know, I have been
eager for our Committee to foster meaningful dialogue about the
importance of recycling. I want to thank him for holding
today's hearing. It is what I hope will be the first of any
number of conversations about what our country can do to
improve recycling education and infrastructure, and producer
responsibility.
I have said in this Committee many, many times, in
adversity lies opportunity. There is plenty of adversity here
on this front, but there is also a lot of opportunity.
Today, we get to focus on a couple of my favorite issues,
that is electric vehicles and recycling. I expect we will learn
more today about how investments in each of these areas can
support the other.
Our country's transportation sector is currently the single
largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in America. It
wasn't always that way, but it is today.
We know that promoting zero-emission vehicles, such as
electric vehicles--including them, but also, I would add
hydrogen powered vehicles using fuel cells and others as well--
it is one of the best ways we can modernize and clean up our
transportation sector. More electric vehicles on our roads
means easier air, a better climate, and less reliance on
foreign oil.
We also know that while electric vehicles are already one
of the cleanest vehicles available today, over time, they are
only going to get cleaner as the power sector that charges the
electric vehicles gets cleaner. I am certainly not the only one
who sees the vast environmental and economic benefits of
cleaner cars. Cities across the country and countries like
China and Norway are investing significantly to transition to
electric vehicles. I have seen it with my own eyes in my visits
to those countries.
Today, you could ask almost every car manufacturer where
the global vehicle market is heading, and they will tell us
that electric vehicles are the future. That doesn't mean we are
going to have every car, truck, and van on the roads in 10
years to be an electric vehicle; that is not true, or a
hydrogen powered, or powered by natural gas. But a lot of them
will be. We will still have vehicles powered by diesel, still
have vehicles powered by gasoline as well. But given the
challenges we face on climate change, it is important that we
move away from those over time. I think we will.
But as the global market for electric vehicles grows, so
will the demand for the raw materials needed to make the
batteries that power them. Production of electric vehicle
batteries, just like the production of smart phone batteries,
requires critical minerals, such as lithium and cobalt, many of
which are not mined in the USA.
Some of our colleagues believe we must eliminate or lower
mining and environmental standards to keep up with the
increasing demand. I just don't agree with that. I would remind
us that the damage we have seen incurred by cutting corners in
hard rock mining regulations; local communities pay the price
in many cases, in environmental and health effects, sometimes
for generations.
I am confident that the critical mineral mining industry
can meet the new demands of the market forces and produce more
here at home without endangering human health and our
environment. It is important that we do that.
Some of our colleagues will also say that we need to wait
to make real investments in electric vehicles until we have
made investments in domestic critical mineral mining. I think
that is a little bit like saying, we need every American to use
a rotary phone until we mine more for cell phone batteries. It
is what is called a logical fallacy. I don't know that it is
realistic.
For automakers to be competitive in the global market, we
can no longer delay investments in electric vehicles in this
country. Fortunately, more mining isn't the only solution.
Manufacturers are hard at work to create a more sustainable
electric vehicle battery, one that needs fewer critical
minerals.
And of course, technology is rapidly evolving. Just as the
cell phones used 5 years ago are significantly different than
the ones we use now, the kind of vehicle batteries we use today
will not be the same batteries we used 5, 10, or 15 years ago.
We don't, however, need to wait for better battery
technology to have a more sustainable electric vehicle battery.
Using today's technology, we can recycle critical minerals and
other materials found in electric batteries that fuel our
vehicles and our gadgets. Electric waste, or e-waste, was once
destined for the landfill, but now can live a new life as
another product, if recycled properly.
In fact, critical minerals can be infinitely recycled
without losing any of their properties. Imagine that. Battery
recycling also reduces our need for new critical minerals,
reduces the carbon footprint of an electric battery, and
creates economic opportunities through good paying recycling
jobs.
China and the European Union have, or will soon have, laws
in place that require automakers to take on the responsibility
of recycling spent batteries. This incentivizes automakers to
find a new purpose for these batteries and recover the minerals
in them.
Clearly, other countries are stepping up to the plate when
it comes to investments in electric vehicle battery recycling.
It is time for the U.S. to get into the game.
The last thing I would say is, I read in the media this
past week that Ford Motor Company has joined with a major
European auto company to develop a new generation of electric
vehicles. Does anybody know who the partner is in Europe?
Mr. Sanders. Volkswagen.
Senator Carper. Volkswagen, there you go. That is an
interesting partnership, but frankly, I think, a very
encouraging development. We look forward to hearing more about
what the U.S. can to do ensure that we reap the environmental
and economic benefits of e-waste recycling and how we can help
enhance recycling infrastructure and technologies.
We are delighted that you are here. Thank you so much for
joining us.
Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for calling this hearing.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Carper.
I now look forward to welcoming our distinguished panel of
witnesses and experts.
The Committee today welcomes Michael Sanders, who is the
Senior Advisor of Avicenne Energy.
Additionally, James Greenberger, who is the Executive
Director of the National Alliance for Advanced Technology
Batteries International, known as NAATBatt, and Ajay Chawan,
who is the Associate Director of Navigant Consulting.
We welcome all of you.
I would like to remind the witnesses that your full written
testimony will be made part of the official record, so I ask
that you try to keep your statements to 5 minutes, so we will
have plenty of time for questions.
Senator Carper. Could we ask our third witness to introduce
the family member that is the audience?
Senator Barrasso. We will do that when we get to him.
Let me start first with Michael Sanders.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL SANDERS,
SENIOR ADVISOR, AVICENNE ENERGY US
Mr. Sanders. Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
provide testimony concerning the environmental issues and
opportunities in the use of electric batteries.
I am a senior analyst at Avicenne Energy, which is a
premier market research and consulting firm, focused on
rechargeable battery markets and their opportunities. I have
nearly 16 years' experience in the battery market, and I am now
advising many companies in this space.
Electric vehicle demand is growing very rapidly, being led
by China, both for full electric vehicles and buses. China led
with clear direction, along with substantial support and
vehicle subsidies. But most of these are expiring. However, the
mandates for electrification remain in place.
Many of the EU countries and cities have also established
dates for full conversion to electric vehicles. A large group
of U.S. mayors recently released a target to purchase a large
number of electric buses, and the charts in the deck basically
highlight a lot of the data that is behind the testimony. You
see in the charts the growth of electric vehicles worldwide.
From a U.S. perspective, the number of electric vehicles
that are forecast are for a half-million vehicles in 2020, a
million-five by 2025, and 3.7 million vehicles by 2030. This
demand projection is based on current global regulations,
supply chain development, known vehicle launches, expected cost
improvements reaching cost parity, and the growth in transit
and utility vehicles.
The second market that you all asked questions on was the
energy storage system market. Demands are much lower in that
market, but it is starting to grow fairly rapidly.
The cell production is continuing to expand in China. Many
announcements and constructions have begun in the EU, and the
U.S. only has one major announcement for additional
manufacturing.
In the EU, the plants are mainly by the current industry
leaders. Some OEMs have done investment with some of the start
ups, and there are two pending government consortiums, one in
Germany and one in France.
Lithium ions are made up of many different types of
components to produce the cell. The value chain map starts
basically with the main components of the battery and ends with
the OEMs. This is a very well established value chain, and cell
plants have been established in the U.S. But most of the raw
materials still come from Asia. We are seeing major expansion
in cell plants in the EU, and that is leading to raw material
suppliers also expanding in the EU.
The industry is very risk averse, which provides only
limited opportunities for new companies to enter this space.
The U.S. has industry leaders that produce metals raw materials
in many different areas. They go into cathode and salt such as
lithium.
There have been many announcements on lithium investments
in the U.S., but for these investments to become a supplier,
these companies will need to demonstrate products that meet the
quality requirements for batteries and also are cost
competitive.
In cathodes, cobalt is a major component, and the U.S. does
not have a significant position. Significant development has
been progressing for low cobalt or no cobalt containing cathode
systems. OEMs have gone to significant efforts for materials
traceability to ensure that the supply is responsibly sourced.
Nickel is much more abundant. The U.S. is in better
position to provide nickel precursors and the advanced types of
nickel that are required for batteries. Aluminum is also used
in cathodes, current collectors, cell casing, and structural
components.
The U.S. is in a very good position in aluminum, with major
producers like Alcoa, Novelis, and Granges.
Recycling of lithium ion batteries and establishing a
complex value chain is being led by China. They began with
guidance documents in the 1990s, moved to requirements for
recycling for electric vehicles and consumer electronics.
Substantial development has been completed in spent battery
collection centers to prepare batteries for recycling and
transportation hubs.
The industry leaders have established recycling processes
that can recover metal precursors. The piloting facilities have
not reached profitability yet, but with larger scale facilities
we are projecting them to become profitable shortly. Korea is
gaining ground rapidly on China to support their large cell
producers. The EU has established battery recycling mandates
that require 50 percent of the materials to be recycled into--
and there is a major meeting this week in the EU to discuss
raising that to a normal level.
The U.S. could play an ever increasing role in the value
chain. The first major change is for additional cell plants to
be built locally and also materials demand. Second is for local
components manufacturing, and finally to establish meaningful
recycling. This should offer significant opportunities for the
U.S. to become more relevant while managing the environmental
and safety concerns. I think the ``China-like'' model of
starting the process by establishing targets, assisting
facilities for collecting and recycling could go a long way in
demonstrating commitment and getting results.
I thank you for the opportunity today to provide my
testimony. I look forward to answering additional questions and
supporting the Committee's work in the future.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sanders follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Greenberger.
STATEMENT OF JAMES J. GREENBERGER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
ALLIANCE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY BATTERIES INTERNATIONAL
Mr. Greenberger. Good morning Chairman Barrasso, Ranking
Member Carper, and members of the Committee.
My name is James Greenberger. I am the Executive Director
of NAATBatt International, a trade association of about 120
corporations and research institutions working to promote
advanced battery technology and the industries it will power in
North America.
The subject of my testimony is the important role that
recycling of lithium ion batteries can play in developing new
industry and supporting reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
Advanced battery technology will be one of the most
important technologies of the 21st century. Lithium ion battery
chemistry, which was invented in the United States, represents
the most powerful new battery technology widely used in
commerce today.
Lithium ion batteries not only power but enable electric
vehicles, wearable and implantable medical devices, mobile
robotics, consumer electronic devices, drones, the Internet of
Things, high energy weapons, and a variety of other new
electric devices. Several new technologies will shape human
society in the 21st century. Advanced battery technology will
be but one of them.
But advanced battery technology is unique in that it will
enable many of those other technologies. Nations wanting
leadership in those technologies will need a vibrant, advanced
battery industry within their borders.
For the United States to have a vibrant lithium ion battery
industry, it needs to ensure that U.S. based manufacturers have
access to the energy materials and compounds needed to
manufacture batteries. Few of those energy materials, such as
lithium, nickel, and cobalt, are found in great quantities in
the United States, and almost none of the chemicals into which
those energy materials must be processed to make batteries are
manufactured here currently.
Recycling lithium ion batteries used in the United States
offers a partial solution to this supply chain problem.
Recycling batteries can create a strategic reserve of battery
materials which can provide supply and some assurance of price
stability to domestic manufacturers.
Building a strong lithium ion industry in the United States
is critically important. Few other industries have the
potential to create more jobs--both upstream and downstream of
their immediate products--than advanced battery manufacturing.
As we have long pointed out at NAATBatt, who makes the
batteries will one day make the cars.
Recycling high voltage lithium ion batteries is also
important for the environment and for public safety. Making
lithium ion battery cathode materials from recycled batteries
can use as little as 18 percent as much energy, 23 percent as
much water, and produce only 9 percent as much SOx
emissions as producing those compounds from virgin materials.
Recycling high voltage lithium ion batteries at the end of
their useful lives also removes them from potential contact
with incautious adults and curious children. A high voltage
battery, no longer powerful enough to power a car, is still
powerful enough to electrocute a human being.
Recycling lithium ion batteries is a matter of public
safety, as well as good environmental stewardship. But
recycling lithium ion batteries in the United States is a major
problem. It is impossible, using current recycling technology,
to make money from recycling most lithium ion batteries.
The cost of shipping, storing, and recycling those
batteries is simply greater than the revenues to be made from
selling the recycled materials. As a consequence, fewer than 5
percent of lithium ion batteries reaching the end of useful
life are recycled in the United States today.
New recycling technology, such as the direct recycling
technology being developed at the Department of Energy's new
ReCell Center, may in time change this dynamic. But unless and
until it does, the only way to recycle lithium ion batteries
will be to require consumers, directly or indirectly, to pay
for the cost of that recycling.
Electric vehicles and stationary energy storage of
renewably generated electricity are powerful tools in the fight
against greenhouse gas emissions. Imposing recycling costs on
consumers on top of the still expensive cost of lithium ion
batteries will inevitably impact market demand and greenhouse
gas mitigation efforts. It is essential that recycling costs be
kept as low as possible.
I would respectfully recommend that the Committee consider
four actions to protect U.S. economic competitiveness and
greenhouse gas reduction efforts. First, ensure that any
program requiring the recycling of high voltage lithium ion
batteries be implemented on a consistent, nationwide basis.
Second, encourage environmental and transportation
regulations that differentiate between sophisticated, high
voltage lithium ion batteries, the kind used in electric
vehicles, and the smaller, far less consistent lithium ion
batteries used in consumer devices.
Third, limit the export of used lithium ion batteries in
order to ensure a steady supply of battery materials to U.S.
battery manufacturers.
And fourth, fund more research into next generation
technologies that may make recycling lithium ion batteries
safer, cheaper, and in time, hopefully profitable.
Thank you very much for your attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Greenberger follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Greenberger.
And now, Mr. Chawan, and if you would, introduce your son
as well.
STATEMENT OF AJAY CHAWAN,
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, NAVIGANT CONSULTING, INC.
Mr. Chawan. Thank you very much for having me here today.
Good morning, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, members
of the committee.
My name is Ajay Chawan, and I will introduce my 10-year-old
son, J.D. Chawan, who is here to cheer me on.
I am glad you recognized him, as he is growing up in a
world where plugging in an EV is as natural as plugging in an
iPad. When I would come home from work, when he was 3 years
old, he would come in to put the plugger in the car. Now for
people like him and his cohort, an EV is just another thing you
plug in.
I really appreciate the opportunity to be here with you
today to provide testimony regarding the benefits, challenges,
and opportunities associated with electrified transportation. I
have worked in the EV space since 2012, and have led the effort
to bring three electrified vehicles to market, with two
different automakers. Currently, I am a member of the
Transportation and Grid Team at Navigant Consulting, where I
help organizations, including municipalities and utilities,
transition to using electric vehicles.
The movement toward the development and production of
electric vehicles represents a revolution in how goods and
people will move, and has the potential to impact numerous
portions of our lives. Three areas I would like to touch on
today include energy security, jobs, and health.
Electric vehicles provide a significant opportunity to
reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The U.S. is a net
importer of about 854 million barrels of oil annually. For each
consumer EV that gets put on the road, we can reduce our oil
consumption by 25 barrels per year. The same EVs can be powered
by electricity produced by a variety of domestic energy sources
that employ American workers.
The transportation sector is a significant source of
employment in America. The consumer automotive segment alone
directly employs over 7 million people and indirectly impacts
millions of others who live in those communities. As the
transportation technology advances, the nature of these jobs
will continue to evolve. The need for workers who are skilled
in computer programming, advanced manufacturing, and chemistry
will continue to increase. American students who have benefited
from emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and math, or
STEM curriculums, will be well equipped to enter these
technology focused spaces.
Finally, eliminating the tailpipes on cars and trucks will
result in cleaner air due to a reduction in particulates,
including carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide, from engine
exhaust. These and other exhaust components are known to
contribute to costly diseases, including asthma, heart disease,
and cancer. One 2010 study found that if clean air standards
were met in California, 30,000 emergency room visits would have
been avoided, saving $193 million in hospital expenses for that
State alone. EVs will help achieve those clean air standards
nationally.
EVs have been growing in popularity since they entered the
market on a mass scale at the beginning of this decade. In
2012, there were approximately 14,000 EVs sold across six
models. In 2018, more than 225,000 vehicles were sold across 16
models, an increase of 1,500 percentage points. Next year,
consumers will have at least 40 models of EVs to choose from.
For reference, total annual vehicle sales in the U.S. is
somewhere between $15 million and $17 million, depending on how
the economy is doing. That is across 500 units. In 2030,
Navigant projects that there will be about 3 million EVs sold
that year, and that 13 million EVs will be on the road in that
year as well.
One of the key opportunities to address with the increase
in EV proliferation is what to do when the vehicle goes off the
road, what do you do with that battery? I think my fellow
panelists have addressed that point. The average life of a car
or truck in the U.S. is about 11 years. After this time, the EV
battery still has about 70 percent of its storage capacity
left.
One option receiving significant consideration today is
using these batteries to provide backup power at critical
locations, such as military facilities, hospitals, and data
centers. Finding uses to give second life batteries a new home
is an area my team is very much focused on today.
As research and development dollars continue to flow into
the EV battery space, their characteristics will continue to
evolve. This includes the very elements used to make batteries
and the methods by which they can be redeployed and later
recycled. Our research and data shows that there are social,
domestic energy security, economic, and societal benefits from
electric transportation that are poised to increase in the
coming years.
Again, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to be
here today. I look forward to our discussion.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Chawan follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much to all three of you.
You can tell how much interest there is in this topic by the
number of Senators who have already arrived to listen to you.
Mr. Sanders, relatively little critical mineral mining
occurs in the United States, even though we do have some
mineral resources. Just last week, CNBC had an article out, and
it discussed opportunities for Wyoming to increase our domestic
supply of minerals. I am going to enter this article into the
record, without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. In your testimony, you highlighted
interest in producing critical minerals domestically. Could you
discuss what is driving the interest, and how can we do more of
these activities in the U.S. in an environmentally responsible
way?
Mr. Sanders. The interest comes from really a couple of
different areas. Most of these materials have extremely long
supply chains.
Take cobalt, for instance. Most of it is mined in the
Congo. It then goes to Asia for production of cathodes, and
then back to wherever the country is that the battery is being
produced.
So it would be a much more efficient supply chain, if a
cell is being produced here in the U.S., if the minerals and
raw materials also came from the U.S. So that is the easiest
one. That is a tremendous cost to the industry, of relocating
these materials from these various areas.
The second things is, just from an environmental
perspective, if the U.S. can become competitive in supplying
these materials, it then reduces our reliance on China and
other areas basically being the leaders in this space.
Your article on Wyoming was focused in on rare earth type
materials. Those are very critical to electric vehicles, mostly
in the motor and the magnet side of the equation, a little bit
in lithium ion. But there has also been reports of lithium
reserves in western States, Wyoming and Nevada and others.
So there is the potential of the U.S. becoming competitive
and supplying the critical material.
Senator Barrasso. Can we do it in an environmentally
responsible way?
Mr. Sanders. I think all of these materials and mining can
be done in a responsible way, as long as it has the right
guidance and establishment of processes. My prior career was
with DuPont, and we had lots of chemical processes and so forth
that could be operated in a lot of different areas. So that
type of thing can be set up responsibly, it just needs to have
the right systems put in place.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Greenberger, in your testimony, you
talk about the need to manage spent batteries because of the
public safety concerns. You said if we do not properly dispose
of high voltage lithium ion batteries, it is not a question of
if a child wandering through a field or a junk yard would be
electrocuted, but how many, and long it would be before we
decide to do something about it.
How do spent batteries pose electrocution or fire risks,
and what should we do about it?
Mr. Greenberger. As spent batteries are high voltage
electric equipment, just like any high voltage electric
equipment, someone who opens one up and touches the wrong part
of it is likely to have a very bad outcome. So we have to do
something to make sure that at the end of useful life, those
batteries are removed from the environment, are decommissioned,
disassembled, and hopefully recycled.
There is a real public need to make sure that that happens.
I know members of my organization very much look forward to
working with this Committee and the Congress in trying to
figure out exactly how best to do that.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Sanders, you may know about how much
it would cost to recycle a lithium ion battery from an electric
vehicle. Do we see that cost decreasing through new and
innovative recycling techniques?
Mr. Sanders. The best place to look for economics on
recycling today is looking at what China did. They basically
established collection facilities to basically collect the
battery packs into a reasonable location, prepare those for
recycling, and ship those then to a recycling center. The
processes that have been established in China, though they are
only at piloting level, appear to be able to, once they get to
full commercial scale, to recover enough metals to basically
recover the cost of the recycling piece.
The piece that still remains a cost to the overall system
is that collection piece. Those batteries that are collected
and then sold in China to the recycling centers are done at the
metals cost. So that cost piece still has to be managed in the
value chain. That is still something that has to be worked out
as to how exactly that manages to go forward.
Somebody mentioned earlier the lead acid being 99 percent
here in the U.S. That is true. But the processes established
and the procedure there that basically got to where there were
collection facilities in place, and also as we buy, as
consumers, batteries in the marketplace, we also pay a
recycling fee when we buy a battery at the local supply chain.
So there are ways of managing those types of things, they just
have to be figured out, what is the best way to manage that
economically.
Senator Barrasso. Do you have an estimate of the current
cost to recycle a lithium ion battery from an electric vehicle?
Mr. Sanders. From raw material all the way, or from
basically collecting it from the spent vehicle, to the total
reproduction, probably in the neighborhood of $5,000, depending
on size of vehicle and so forth. The metals value is probably
in the $3,500 range. So a substantial portion of that can be
recovered from the metals piece of it.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Again, thank you all. This is fascinating
and I believe encouraging.
Some of our colleagues arrived mercifully after the
Chairman and I gave our opening statements, but I just want to
go back and reiterate one of the things I said.
It was just announced last week, a joint venture between
Ford and Volkswagen, to develop the next generation electric
vehicle. These vehicles are coming, and there are going to be a
lot more of them on the road, which I think is a good thing.
Hopefully a lot of those vehicles are going to be made here in
America, with components, including batteries, that are
American.
I have reminded my colleagues a time or two in the past
that the Detroit Auto Show--which I go to just about every
year--11 or 12 years ago, the car of the year was Chevrolet
Volt, V-O-L-T, an electric hybrid, 38 miles on a charge. A year
or 2 ago, the Chevrolet Bolt, B-O-L-T, all electric, 240 miles
on a charge. Next year at the Detroit Auto Show, we will see
Tesla vehicles and others getting 300 miles on a charge. This
is coming.
We can either be part of it and be very much invested and
enjoined in the creation of these manufacturing jobs, the
research and manufacturing, recycling, or not, or let somebody
else do it. We have to be smart enough to take full advantage
of it. As we say in Delaware, Carper diem, also known as carpe
diem.
I would ask this question, if I can, I want to make sure I
pronounce your name right. Is it Chawan?
Mr. Chawan. Chawan, yes, sir.
Senator Carper. Thank you. In your written testimony, you
mentioned that between 2012 and 2018, electric vehicle sales in
our country grew by 1,500 percent. You go on to say that during
the same time period, electric vehicle sales in China increased
by almost 8,000 percent. The growth trend isn't expected to
slow down any time soon.
It is my understanding that if current trends continue,
China could account for half of the global electric vehicle
market share by 2025. Other countries are also adopting
electric vehicles at a faster rate than the U.S.
Should the elected Government support the deployment of
electric vehicles in the U.S. to ensure that China and the rest
of the world do not dominate the future of transportation
electrification? In your answer would you discuss how Federal
investments in electric vehicle charging infrastructure in this
country would help our car manufacturers to be competitive?
Mr. Chawan. Thank you for your question, sir. In order to
promote EV adoption in the U.S., there are three pillars that
we typically look at. We look at infrastructure, we look at the
product cost, and we look at awareness. So awareness generation
has been taking place through many activities, including
activities by the automakers, by other third parties such as
network operators.
The network operators are also building infrastructure.
There are several national network operators out there today.
There are also network infrastructures being built by electric
utilities, which is an area that we spend a lot of time
focusing on as well.
Last is the cost piece. As the proliferation of EVs
continues, the cost per unit will continue to go down. We are
kind of in the $6,000 per flat panel TV stage of the technology
development curve. As more and more volume comes online, the
economies of scale will kick in, and new manufacturing
techniques and advances in production will enable us to bring
the cost per unit down. That will help with the affordability
factor of electric vehicles.
Senator Carper. Good, thanks. Just one follow up question
to that, if I could. Based on what you know today, do we have
sufficient critical minerals available to be able to produce
enough batteries to support the projected electric vehicle
growth in our country?
Mr. Chawan. In our country? I do not have that information,
sir. The last--the only reference point I have is from a USGS
report on some of the critical elements that were talked about
today for battery production. USGS shows that the U.S. has less
than 1 percent of global reserves of nickel, cobalt, and
lithium.
Senator Carper. All right. A follow up question to you, Mr.
Chawan. In your testimony, you stated that battery research is
happening today that if successful, would dramatically reduce
the quantity of critical minerals needed to build and run an
electric vehicle battery.
My question is, how far along is this research in the U.S.?
Do you see automakers switching from a more traditional lithium
ion battery to a more sustainable battery? Do you agree with
what I said in my statement that the electric vehicle batteries
we are using today are most likely not the battery technologies
we are going to be using 5 or 10 years from now?
Mr. Chawan. I think there are three answers to each point
individually. Question one was about how far battery research
is coming along. There are numerous reports out there for what
is the next generation of batteries commonly referred to as
solid state, where the liquid portion of the battery is changed
to a solid material.
Toyota has stated it is going to have that out by 2022, and
some reports say it could be even sooner than that. That would
represent a major shift in battery technology.
The question about what our batteries will look like
several years from now versus today, the chemistry will very
likely be different. As far as what that chemistry looks like,
I don't know for sure.
And I am sorry, could you repeat the other question?
Senator Carper. Do you agree with what I said earlier in my
statement, that the electric vehicle batteries that we are
going to be using in 5 or 10 years are going to be different?
That was my last part, I think you responded to that.
Mr. Chawan. Thank you.
Senator Carper. I am going to slip out for a little bit. We
all have other committees that are meeting right now. In the
Homeland Security committee, we are having an important
roundtable discussion on push and pull factors leading to all
the surge of people coming to our borders. So I will be going
to that, and I will be back. I am very much interested in
everything you have to say.
Mr. Chairman, I am delighted that we are having this
hearing. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Carper.
Senator Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, I want to get into the record this article in
Fortune Magazine; it talks about some of the child labor
problems.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Inhofe. Mr. Chawan, I have spent a lot of time in
Africa. I know some of the problems that are there. We know
that most of this mining we are talking about is in Congo. We
know of some of the problems that were pointed out by the
Chairman, the picture up here of some of the problems that I am
very familiar with.
We know that children are used in cobalt mining, primarily
in the Congo, and some of the companies are taking initiatives
to better ensure that batteries are ethically mined. What is
your thought about that? What have we accomplished, and what
can we do that we are not doing now?
Mr. Chawan. The traceability of materials I think would be
potentially another way to describe what you are referring to.
It is definitely possible. It is done in other industries
today. For example, the food industry does that very well. The
auto industry does that very well for manufacturing, so we know
precisely----
Senator Inhofe. So you would be doing it just as well as it
is being done right now?
Mr. Chawan. It is being done in these other industries for
sure. I do not have familiarity with the mining industry, so I
cannot speak to the traceability there. I can simply state that
there are best practices from other industries that could
potentially be adopted for the mining industry.
I think one of the challenges that we would see is what
happens when you mix raw materials from multiple sources at a
processing facility.
Senator Inhofe. OK, it sounds like if you have any
problems, just consult your son.
[Laughter.]
Senator Inhofe. Well, I actually do that. I have 20 kids
and grandkids. I fly airplanes, and every time I get a new
instrument for an airplane, I have my grandkids read the manual
and explain it to me. So I am serious when I make that
suggestion.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Chawan. I am happy to chat separately about this with
your office.
Senator Inhofe. All right. I have another article, Daily
Caller article, to be made part of the record.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Inhofe. This covers some of the problems with the
labor problems that are in there.
I would like to--Mr. Sanders, this article talks about how
California is contributing to the increased demand on cobalt.
We know that is the case. Environmentalists claim that electric
cars are the solution to many of the problems that we have. I
would also suggest that maybe they are the problem than other
solutions.
For example, what is happening with the Highway Trust Fund
right now, the reason it is in trouble, is primarily due to
electric cars. Then we have the human rights concerns. Earlier
this year, the State of California debated a bill that would
require the State to ensure zero-emissions vehicles that they
are free from materials using child labor. Now, that bill
failed, and the reason is very simple: a prohibition of this
kind would get in the way of maintaining the radical electric
vehicle mandate.
Unfortunately, California turned a blind eye to the human
rights abuses.
Mr. Sanders, could you talk about these human rights
concerns in the remaining time?
Mr. Sanders. Well, I think the human rights concerns are
real. The traceability is also becoming real. Multiple OEMs,
global OEMs have established traceability programs from the
mines in the Congo, all the way through their supply chain. So
it is something that can be executed. And it is being executed
by some of the major OEMs.
The other point that is starting to happen--Senator Carper
pointed it out and asked, are batteries today going to be the
same as they 5 years and 10 years from now. There are
substantial programs to reduce the amount of cobalt that is
contained in batteries, and potentially to go to zero-cobalt
batteries in the very near future. Lots of universities and
OEMs have claimed significant breakthroughs. So I think the
percentage of cobalt per battery is likely to go down
dramatically, which will also further improve the situation.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Sanders.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thanks, Senator Inhofe.
Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I very much
appreciate your leadership, and Senator Carper's leadership, on
this issue.
It is clear that consumer choice for electric vehicles is
there. We have seen the increase in demand. Consumers like it.
It is an imperative on our environment to reduce carbon
emissions.
So this is clearly not only the future, it is the present.
And we need to encourage this.
The supply chain issues are real. I just really want to
underscore the concerns that have been raised by my colleagues.
We cannot allow that vulnerability for our consumers rewarding
labor practices which are totally unacceptable, and the
security issues of our own supply chain. So that is an issue
that I fully support the leadership of this Committee, to look
at alternative ways. You have mentioned legislation, Mr.
Chairman, I think we all need to look at ways to be more secure
in that regard.
I want to get to the recycling issue for one moment. To me,
that seems like low hanging fruit. As I understand it, we are
very dependent on recycling outside the United States. We do
not have the domestic industries here to handle the demand that
is clearly here today, and will grow tomorrow. That reduces the
need for a lot of these critical materials. It also is much
friendlier toward our environment generally. And it
economically makes sense.
Mr. Greenberger, let me start with you. What do we do as
Congress to encourage the robust development of domestic
recycling for these batteries?
Mr. Greenberger. Ultimately, what you need to do, what we
need to do as a Nation is really encourage the development of a
market for these products in the United States. Just to go back
to the human rights issue that was earlier talked about, it
really is a problem, that human rights abuses are going on in
the Congo, and there is really nothing we can do about it, if
China is buying 80 percent of cobalt, which is what is going on
today. Because the Chinese don't have the same concerns that we
do about human rights issues.
If we built a vibrant battery industry in the United
States, by building a vibrant industry for electric vehicles,
suddenly we have some control over our future, or over human
rights violations abroad, over how we recycle batteries and use
the materials here in the United States.
So it really does come down, for me, to the issue of, if we
are going to be serious about competing in this new technology,
we have to do essentially what China did, and that is build a
domestic demand for the products. It is really important, and
not just for cars and not even just for greenhouse gas emission
issues, it is really important because it is the technology of
the future, and it is going to impact a number of industries
that are important to this country and that are going to be the
source of jobs.
Senator Cardin. I agree with that point. I am proud of
Maryland; we have companies that are on the cutting edge of
battery technology. You are right, it is well beyond just
transportation. But it is an area where the United States
should excel, and we are not as competitive as we need to be.
So I completely agree with you.
This Committee, of course, needs to look at the
transportation infrastructure. It seems to me that by
recycling, we not only are doing things that are smart
economically, but we are reducing our demand on the supply
chain. I couldn't agree with you more, we should be able to
have control of our supply chain, and we don't. China right now
is the dominant player on it.
So we need to develop an entire industry. But it seems to
me, low hanging fruit is the recycling of the batteries. What
do we need to do to get that moving?
Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Sanders. One of the biggest areas that is probably the
first challenge that we are facing is, how do we get these used
batteries back into the supply chain. If you look at how China
set up their model to begin with, the first step that they took
was establishing a mandate that basically a certain percentage
needed to be recycled. Then they established basically a
protocol to get these things to collection centers.
We all have probably a dozen of these things sitting in our
house that are waste batteries and waste electronics that have
value. If we got to having a robust collection facility
approach, that then goes a long way. Because then you have a
supply chain of materials that then can go into recycling, can
go into the value chain.
But until you get these things collected, they are
scattered throughout the U.S. and around the world, and that is
a huge challenge for everybody. The EU is meeting this week
regarding these and how many of these are used in each
different country. So they actually have data to then go, how
big is the problem, or how big is the opportunity.
I think that is the first step, is kind of understanding
where these challenges are, and putting together a directive
that basically says, here is where we are going. We may not
know all the answers of how to get there. But until we
basically say, we are going in this direction, it is really
hard to get everybody motivated into one organized direction.
Senator Cardin. I would just conclude by saying, I agree
with you. The supply today is huge, just in order to get this
started. But think about where we are going to be tomorrow. I
mean, it is just going to continue to grow. And you can't put
these policies into effect overnight. It is going to take time.
We are already well behind where we need to be, and when we
look at the future, it is imperative that we act quickly.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Cardin.
Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank all of
you.
We talked a lot about the core materials that are needed
for the batteries. But we do have rare earth elements that are
essential to some of that. You all have alluded to some of this
in some of your testimony. It is a particular source of
interest to me, because of what we see happening in our State
of West Virginia. We know that the last rare earth mine closed,
but then reopened, but they are having difficulty with their
profitability.
Even though they were able to mine some of the materials,
they had to send it, my understanding is, to China to have it
refined. That is an issue and an expense at the same time.
So I think we need to guard ourselves against the shocks,
the global supplies, of these rare earth elements. At West
Virginia University, led by--I am going to call him Dr. Z,
because that is what we call him, has been exploring technology
to clean up the waste and generate concentrated rare earth
elements in our coal, our fly ash, and our acid mine drainage.
So for me, this holds great promise to solve a domestic supply
problem for us in rare earth, but also has the environmental
benefit of going into prior acid mine damage or fly ash, to be
able to get some benefit out of this and clean it up at the
same time.
They are working with a Pennsylvania company called InnoH2O
Solutions, and I have a letter for the record that I would like
to submit, without objection, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Whitehouse. Without objection, so ordered.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chairman----
Senator Barrasso. In waiting.
[Laughter.]
Senator Capito. That is a good one.
So anyway, I have three questions around this in
particular. I am interested in the recycling issue as well, but
I am going to concentrate on the rare earth.
Can you speak to the importance of rare earth elements in
building EVs, batteries, and drive trains? Are the costs of
these rare earth elements disproportionate to the small volume
that they're used in? Put another way, are they expensive
inputs? How vulnerable do you think we are as Americans to have
access to rare earth elements to be able to threaten this
industry?
I will just start with you, Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Sanders. They are very expensive. That is probably the
easiest one of the questions. We are very vulnerable to the
supply chains of these materials. As you said, most of the
refining of these, and most of the mining of these is done in
China.
Senator Capito. Right.
Mr. Sanders. So that creates a significant challenge. Where
they are really critical is in the motors and the drive train
side of this. In the battery side, less so.
A significant opportunity that we have not talked about
today for the U.S. would also be natural graphite, the anode
side of the equation here. For those States that produce coal,
that could be an option to basically get to a natural graphite
solution. So there are opportunities for the U.S. to
participate here in both the battery and the EV space.
Senator Capito. Mr. Greenberger.
Mr. Greenberger. Again, I believe the problem with the rare
earths and our production of rare earths in the United States
is that the market for rare earths in the United States is
relatively small. So we have not been willing--businesses can't
make investments in those types of projects and hope for a
reasonable rate of return.
The Chinese, because they have done so much to promote
their markets for vehicle electrification and for the other
types of technologies that use rare earths materials, are
really in the catbird seat when it comes to producing and
supporting their own domestic industries. So there is no reason
why we cannot produce rare earths in the United States, and we
should. But the best, fastest, and most direct way to do that
is to build up demand for products that actually will require
rare earth materials and stand back and see what American
businesses will do.
Senator Capito. Right. And that seems to be sort of a
universal thing, certainly with you, but with the panel as
well. The market needs to develop to catch up. But for this
particular--my particular interest on the environmental side, I
think, is the Department of Energy has been very helpful in
terms of helping us to develop that technology.
Mr. Chawan.
Mr. Chawan. Yes, I think I would echo everything the
panelists have said.
The other topic I would add is, as technology develops, the
demand for rare earths is declining. So there is a new
technology called asynchronous motors; it is a motor that in
short, allows for better current flow into the battery for
better torque control on your motor which provides better
driving dynamics. It will also reduce the need for these
materials.
Senator Capito. But are the materials--as far as my
knowledge is here, the materials are used in a vast other
array. It is just creating a bigger market, better market in
this country. Because if China has cornered the market, there
is obviously something there, yes.
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for this
hearing.
Some members of the Committee have expressed concerns about
the sources of raw materials used to make electric vehicle
batteries. As has been pointed out today, mining practices
associated with some of the raw materials in batteries,
particularly cobalt, raise legitimate reason for concern.
Exploiting child labor and using unregulated mining practices
is unacceptable. We must work to avoid these sources.
Mr. Chawan, do all electric vehicle batteries require the
use of cobalt?
Mr. Chawan. For most of the technologies that are popular
today, yes.
Senator Markey. New alternatives, however, are being
developed?
Mr. Chawan. Yes, sir, they are being developed. Tesla, for
example, has already done a great job of reducing the amount of
cobalt that it requires. I believe it is called an 8-1-1
configuration. I can follow up with your office with more
details on that.
A lot of research has been put into reducing the need for
cobalt in EV batteries today. It was simply found that that was
an effective solution in the beginning of this decade, when we
were trying to develop EV batteries for the market.
Senator Markey. So these new alternatives are very
important, because we could focus, perhaps, on the ethical
sourcing?
Mr. Chawan. Precisely. If we can take away the economic
demand for these problematically sourced materials, we can
definitely have a positive impact that way.
Senator Markey. So a coalition of major car manufacturers
has committed to source cobalt ethically; Ford, LG Chem, IBM,
Huayou Cobalt, have undertaken a blockchain project to address
the problem in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Potential
applications like this are why I think we should try to promote
the use of blockchain technology. I am the co-sponsor of a bill
which has already passed out of the Commerce committee last
week. We have to find solutions here, because they will
encourage avoiding mining in vulnerable, marginalized
communities, not only around the world, but even here in the
United States.
So it is important for us to ensure that the notion that
the only choice we have is to trade one child harmed in the
world for a child harmed here, it is just not acceptable.
Yes, sir, Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Sanders. In addition to block chain, standard
traceability techniques that have been used in the food
industry and other areas are being put in place in the Congo.
Only about 20 percent of the mining in the Congo has the
concern of child labor and those issues. The three major
producers in the Congo have responsibly produced cobalt for
quite some time.
Multiple OEMs have established relationships with their
mining partners and their supply chain to basically put
traceability in place. So blockchain is an option. But standard
traceability of shipments and understanding where it is coming
from and ensuring that it is coming through that value chain
has also been put in place by both U.S. OEMs and some German
OEMs that I am aware of.
Mr. Markey. And I want to highlight one other issue, which
is, instead of expanding mining, we should be looking to other
solutions, like recycling. The minerals used in these EV
batteries are used in many electronic products, in military
applications. I am glad to hear today from our witnesses that
recycling can be a bipartisan solution, and would look forward
to working together with all of us on a bipartisan basis in
order to expand efforts in that direction.
When Congress was faced with the environmental impacts of
disposing of lead acid batteries, we took action to create the
necessary incentives to recycle. We should do the same for the
recycling of electric vehicle batteries and all of the
materials that would be central to advancing that goal.
Researchers in my home State of Massachusetts are advancing
the state of lithium ion battery recycling. Companies like
Battery Resources are finding ways to process and re-use these
materials.
Can you give us your insight on that issue as well?
Mr. Chawan.
Mr. Chawan. Yes, on the recycling?
Senator Markey. Yes.
Mr. Chawan. I think what we are really focusing on is
extending the life of the battery. Once it is built, we want to
use that battery for as long as it is humanly possible. So what
we are doing is focusing on, what can we do when the battery
comes out of the vehicle, and finding homes for it in other
applications, for demand response.
So if you can provide backup power for important facilities
such as medical centers and data centers, you can use that
battery for a longer period of time and delay the time that you
need to spend time, energy, and money to break down the battery
into its constituent components. We are hopeful, as more
vehicles come into the market, more batteries come into the
market, we will build up a larger bank of vehicles or batteries
that you will hopefully start to get the economies of scale
better needed to have a robust recycling program.
Senator Markey. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am interested in the carbon footprint. Reading that, to
produce an electric vehicle currently, give or take, it
produces maybe twice the carbon impact versus an internal
combustion engine vehicle. I want to know if that is true or
not, or if that is roughly the dynamic. Then it begs the
question of what the useful life is, and of course, the battery
and so forth.
Has there been any study--and anyone can answer this--to
where you look at what the CAFE standards would have to go to
in terms of miles per gallon before it would make the whole
argument of an electric vehicle more of a moot point? Normally,
that would seem to be something, especially if I was making a
regular vehicle, I would want to know, well, how good would we
need to make the mileage before it would make the whole
argument for electric vehicles maybe less relevant, and
addressing the fact that to produce one, it has twice the
carbon footprint, just to get it on the road.
Mr. Greenberger. I will try that. I have heard this
statistic, about twice the amount of greenhouse emissions.
Senator Braun. Yes.
Mr. Greenberger. I have no idea where that comes from. That
seems a little bit odd to me.
I think certainly recycling is one of the ways that we can
reduce the carbon footprint that it takes to produce an
electric vehicle. But I think that we are also--it is important
to pay attention to another issue in terms of what is really
driving the move to vehicle electrification. Part of it is
greenhouse gas emissions. But part of it is also is that
everything is just electrifying. When we start putting
automatic locks and heated seats in cars, you are moving to
things like autonomous drive, which are huge draws of
electricity on the vehicle, our vehicles are going to become
electric regardless of what fuel prices do. That is just the
way that technology is going. We are going to be riding around
in computers on wheels. And computers don't tend to run on
gasoline very well.
So I think the vehicle electrification is coming for a
number of different reasons. I don't know that just increases
in fuel economy in the internal combustion engine are really
going to, in the long term, significantly slow down that trend.
Senator Braun. Fair point.
Mr. Sanders, you had mentioned earlier roughly $5,000, was
that the cost to rehabilitate a worn battery, or what is the
cost of a new battery in the average EV currently, and what
does it cost to recycle one? Is its life as long as the
original battery once it is recycled?
Mr. Sanders. The $5,000 was a typical battery that is in
China now that is basically for an electric vehicle, so what
would be here a mid-size type vehicle. There is such a range on
each one of those pieces of data that it is hard to quote a
given number. But the bottom line in China is, they have put
together a collection organization, basically, that allows the
folks doing collection and collecting the battery and readying
for recycling to make money. Then it appears now that the
companies that are doing the recycling, because of the metals
value that they can recover out of the recycling process, once
they get to commercial scale, which we are projecting at about
20,000 units, which is not terribly big, they should be able to
make money themselves.
So there appears to be financially viable ways of doing
this. But it is going to take basically that same type of
commitment that China did to basically establish that
directive, establish the collection process and drive it
through the value chain. Whether it ends up being a hybrid of
something like we did for lead acid, where there was support
for the recycling through the value chain, or whether it is
totally done in a different economic model here, I think is
still to be determined.
Senator Braun. And is the projected cost of that recycled
battery, once you got to economy of scale, going to be less
than the original cost of a new one? Is there any data on that?
Because I think that would be a strong case for not only
building the infrastructure for recycling, but it would be a
cost savings, as long as the life of the recycled battery is
close to what the new one would be.
Mr. Sanders. There certainly is that opportunity for
profitability, basically, beyond where they are taking
recycling today. Where they are taking recycling today is to
the metals precursors only. But there is the conversion, then,
to the cathode, there is the conversion into the battery itself
that basically can be done at a profitable level through the
value chain.
But there is also significant companies, an IP that has
been established for conversion of those precursors into a
battery material and into the batteries themselves. So I am not
exactly sure how that is going to play out. That is still to be
determined.
But there are large organizations that have been
established, that are battery manufacturers, that have
established themselves as the leaders in establishing that
value chain and establishing the recycling. So they certainly
think that there is the opportunity there to make money through
this value chain, and to improve profitability and
sustainability by doing it themselves.
Senator Braun. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for
this hearing.
The electric vehicle battery recycling problem falls into a
larger context of electronics recycling generally. As you all
know, the United Nations found that out of 45 million metric
tons of e-waste generated globally, 20 percent gets properly
recycled, and the rest just goes off into whatever kind of junk
operation there is.
A lot of that junk operation is overseas. Do any of you
have anything nice to say about the quality, capability,
integrity, cleanliness, effectiveness of a lot of these off the
books overseas electronic waste disposal operations?
Mr. Greenberger. If I may, yes. Let's make sure that
doesn't happen.
Senator Whitehouse. It is pretty poisonous.
Mr. Greenberger. It is bad stuff.
Senator Whitehouse. And it is badly handled in most of
these overseas operations.
Mr. Greenberger. And the good news is, if we can keep our
waste here and turn it into products that we can use in
domestic manufacturing, it is a double win.
Senator Whitehouse. So let me tell you one quick story,
which is that I have a bill just on the electronic waste that
comes out of these things, our consumer electronics, not
refrigerators and washing machines. And there is a group called
the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, which is the trade
association for this group. My bill would do exactly what you
have proposed, require it to stay here, so that Americans get
the jobs in the recycling and disassembly, so that it does not
contribute to the poisoning of wherever this is done on the
cheap overseas.
ISRI has been opposing the legislation because ISRI
members--guess what?--are invested in overseas operations. So
they have a big conflict of interest on this. We are still
working with them. But we have a real problem with the fact
that some of the groups that are active in Congress on this
subject actually are invested in some of these overseas
operations.
So if we are going to do this, we are going to have to
address that fact head on. I am with you, and I hope we can do
this.
What is each of your best estimates on how many EVs will be
on the road by 2040? By that, I mean cars, trucks, and buses.
Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Sanders. Twenty-forty is a long way out there, but we
are projecting 3.7 million by 2030. If you stay on that same
ballpark curve of where that is by 2030, that should put it
somewhere in the range of 6 million.
Senator Whitehouse. OK.
Mr. Sanders. So at that point we would be at 6 million
vehicles per year sold. So in addition, basically if you look
at that----
Senator Whitehouse. So you stack it up year over year.
Mr. Sanders. Yes, if you stack that up basically from
today, you would be sitting probably in the range of 50 million
vehicles.
Mr. Greenberger. So I am going to defer to my two witnesses
that are in the business of collecting this data.
Mr. Chawan. Senator Whitehouse, I have data through 2030 in
front of me from our latest forecast. U.S. EV sales in 2030 are
about 3 million. And the U.S. EV population in that same year,
so total light duty vehicles on the road is about 14 million.
Senator Whitehouse. U.S.?
Mr. Chawan. U.S.
Senator Whitehouse. How about globally?
Mr. Chawan. Globally I don't have those figures. I can
follow up with you.
Senator Whitehouse. I will do a request for the record, a
QFR, so you can follow up.
Mr. Sanders. Globally, you have through 2030 in my
testimony. There is one chart. And basically by 2030, we are
projecting, I think it is around 11 million vehicles to be sold
in 2030. So the cumulative, basically, if you looked at that
from a 2040 basis, in addition to the 50 here, there would
probably be close to 50 in Europe, and probably close to 100
million in Asia. So 200 million vehicles, roughly.
Senator Whitehouse. And as people who look at this market,
I think there was an expectation that when electric vehicles
came into the market, they would be basically glorified golf
carts and kind of cheesy, and people would laugh at them. In
fact, they are coming in through Audi, Jaguar, Mercedes,
Bentley has even started displaying its concept EV.
Mr. Sanders. Porsche.
Senator Whitehouse. Porsche has a huge car that is actually
coming to market right now. They are coming in, not at the
bottom of the market like glorified golf carts, they are coming
in at the top of the market as vehicles that compete on
performance with Lamborghinis and cost a quarter, or a third,
or a tenth as much. What does it say to you about adoption,
that these vehicles are coming in at the top of the market as
market leading, aspirational purchases, rather than as
glorified golf carts creeping into the bottom of the market?
Mr. Sanders. I don't know whether you all have had the
opportunity or the fun driving experience of driving an
electric vehicle.
Senator Whitehouse. We have two Bolts, which is probably
the cheapest and least exciting of all these electric vehicles.
And it is great, it is amazing, it is a wonderful vehicle.
Mr. Sanders. Right. The torque is incredible. The amount of
noise is just next to nothing. And the only cost of
maintenance, basically, that is demonstrating that it is going
up versus going down, is tires. That is because we are all
going a little too fast in the electric vehicles. But they are
a hoot.
And the breadth of vehicles that are starting to be offered
now, you are right, there are certainly the premier vehicles
and so forth. But if you look at some of the launches now by
General Motors and by Volkswagen and some of the others, they
are hitting the midstream, main focus of vehicles. We are
projecting cost parity now for electric vehicles to happen by
2023 to 2025.
So when these things actually start costing equal to or
less than internal combustion engine vehicles, that is when we
really start hitting the curve for these things taking off.
Senator Whitehouse. And I have overdone my time, so let me
just ask unanimous consent to put into the record a report on
electric vehicles being cleaner from cradle to grave.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank all of you for your testimony.
I want to thank the Chairman and the Ranking Member for
having this hearing. I think it is a really important and
timely hearing.
I was listening in by TV before I came here. Mr.
Greenberger, I thought I heard you say he who makes the battery
will ultimately make the car. Is that right?
Mr. Greenberger. That is correct.
Senator Van Hollen. And we also know just by looking at
where we are today in the United States compared to China, for
example, we are way behind. We just have a couple recent
headlines: China is building the batteries of the future;
electric cars, China powers the battery supply. We had
mentioned the fact that they have a lot of natural resources in
China.
But they also are doing the recycling. They are doing a
major recycling program. They have also been much more
strategic about overseas supply operations.
So my question is this, because we are talking about the
future market for electric cars, we are also talking about the
fact that China has a huge head start. If you look at their
investment in clean energy overall from 2005 to 2018, it has
gone up like a rocket ship. We were essentially a little bit
ahead of them in 2005, the United States, if you looked at both
public and private investment in clean energy. They are now way
ahead of us, and it has been a steady incline.
So what does that mean to all of you in terms of who is
going to be making the cars around the world when it comes to
the electric car industry? What would you do, if you were czar,
if you were king for a day here in the United States, what are
the three things that you would do, that we could do, to help
change this?
Mr. Greenberger, you talked about how we need to juice the
market, you need more demand, get more people to invest. But it
is a little bit of a chicken and egg situation, right? So
Senator Markey and I and others have bills that would create
more of a financing authority, kind of a green bank, a climate
bank, to help more U.S. investment go into clean energy.
But what are the three things each of you would do, here
for the United States, to address the challenge that we see
before us? If you could just give me the top three. I am
looking for anything that also requires congressional action.
Mr. Greenberger. Sure, first of all, I think we should look
at history to some extent. We have seen this movie before. Ten
years ago, we wanted the United States to get into the electric
vehicle business, and the ARA devoted $2 billion to battery
manufacturing in the United States and to promote electric
vehicles.
Those investments were not particularly successful, because
it was sort of build it and they will come type investment. It
didn't really pan out. Most of those projects turned out not to
be commercially successful, and many ended up being bought by
Chinese companies.
China took a somewhat different approach. They decided to
incent demand. There are 400,000 electric buses in China; there
are 2,000 electric buses, about, in the United States. There
were huge incentives put into electric vehicles. There was a
market created for vehicle electrification. If you take a look
at a lot of the things we hear about China, that we don't like
about China, about them promoting a technology transfer, it is
all by companies trying to access this consumer market in
China.
So the lesson to be learned from the last 10 years, from my
perspective, is pay attention to market demand rather than
technology push. That is really where the Chinese have gained
their leverage. If you can create that market demand, however
you are going to do it, whether that is by additional vehicle
subsidies, whether that is by purchasing electric buses or
heavy duty trucks for municipalities or government
organizations, however you want to do it, if you can do that,
you are going to be far better along than you will be of just
trying to build a supply chain for a demand that doesn't yet
exist on a real basis.
Senator Van Hollen. Got it, thank you.
Mr. Sanders. I guess the guidance that I would give us,
don't invent the process. There are multiple examples today by
China of establishing very clear direction and sticking with
it. We have a tendency here of wandering in direction. And when
you wander in direction, you get poor results. Jim mentioned
the facilities that were built in 2008. Great intentions at the
time.
But the market wasn't there. And then we didn't stay with
the program. We then went off to some other different
direction.
If you look at how China established clear guidance that we
are going to electrify, now their problem for pollution was
substantially worse than ours. So they had to do something.
They had no choice.
But if you look at what is happening in Europe now, you are
getting very clear direction. Norway set deadlines, England set
deadlines, Germany has set deadlines for when they are going to
convert from internal combustion engines to electrified
vehicles.
And now the overall business infrastructure is getting
behind that. And it gives them a clear path to basically then
execute to do what business does well, see the opportunity and
say, OK, the game is going to change, how am I going to
participate in that game and win. We have the opportunity to
win here. It is just a matter of, it has to be a clear
direction in where we are going.
Senator Van Hollen. Got it. Thank you.
Mr. Chawan. What I will add to this is, continuing to
support legislation that promotes electric vehicles, so the
Drive American Forward Act that Senators Stabenow and Alexander
have co-sponsored, which includes increasing the Federal tax
credit for electric vehicles from $200,000 to $600,000 per
manufacturer. That allows consumers to help make up that
difference in true cost between an EV and a conventional
vehicle, and other tax credits to that effect.
That is what you need when you have a nascent market. As I
said earlier in my testimony, we are still in the age of $6,000
flat panels, we are at that early stage of the technology
curve.
The second thing I would do from a congressional level is
to continue to support advanced research. So the advanced
battery research technology that is being done is done by many
of our national labs, including Oak Ridge and NREL. That work
will help to create these new battery technologies that will
have different chemistries than they have today, and that will
enable us to bring down the overall price of the vehicle. And
the battery is the largest component of that price today.
Senator Van Hollen. I appreciate that.
Mr. Chairman, I think all three have indicated you need
national incentives and push and guidance, if I was able to get
unanimous agreement on that.
I do worry, we have to make sure that the politics doesn't
get in our way up here. Because right now we are, in my view,
losing this importance race. We got behind on 5G, and we are
getting behind really fast. We are already behind; we have to
catch up on this.
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Again, thank you all for your testimony. It
has been enormously encouraging and important.
Senator Inhofe mentioned earlier in his questioning that
electric vehicles--I have two unanimous consent requests. But I
think Jim in his question mentioned that vehicles are the
primary reason, electric vehicles are the primary reason we
face a shortfall in our Highway Trust Fund.
While I believe we must find--I know the Chairman agrees--
we must find a way for electric vehicles to pay their fair
share for using the roads, I would ask unanimous consent to
insert into the record a Business Journal article on the
purchasing power of the Highway Trust Fund. It states basically
the 18 cent gas tax provides about 90 percent of the funds we
need that we are using in the Trust Fund.
That tax was set in 1993. If it had been modified for
inflation over the last X number of years, it would be not 18
cents, but 32 cents.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Finally, I would just ask unanimous consent
to submit for the record, Mr. Chairman, other materials
relevant to today's discussion.
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. We are sorry to run off. We are in the
final seconds of a vote.
Fifteen Senators attended today, which shows how much
interest there is in what you had to say and the questions, in
asking those.
Others may submit questions for the record. We would ask
for your written answers to those. The hearing is going to
remain open for 2 weeks.
I want to thank all of you for being here. Thank you for
bringing your son, and thanks for discussing such an important
issue.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]