General

UL Solutions broke ground on its North America Advanced Battery Laboratory in Auburn Hills, Michigan, yesterday—with the NAM in attendance! The new facility will offer testing and certification for EVs and industrial batteries, a crucial step in establishing EV-ecosystem hubs.

A Charlotte, North Carolina–based company that started life as a paper mill is now the world’s largest lithium producer—and “a key cog in a tight global supply chain for battery metals used in electric cars, smartphones and other applications at a time when governments are pushing to electrify their economies,” according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: Albemarle is one of the few companies that can produce lithium at a competitive cost, thanks in large part to its 2015 purchase of a lithium producer in New Jersey.

• The global lithium market has grown an enormous 2,900% since that purchase, to $48 billion from $1.6 billion.
• To keep up with demand, “Albemarle has embarked on new acquisitions and capacity building,” including an ongoing bid to purchase Australian lithium miner Liontown Resources.
• Last month, Albemarle—which also mines lithium at operations in Nevada and Chile—announced plans to double the capacity of a lithium hydroxide plant in Western Australia in which it has an 85% stake.
• Lithium is also used in “industrial-scale batteries that can store energy from solar panels and wind farms and smaller ones for residential use.”

Competing with China: The company’s “integrated approach has put it at the center of Western efforts to diversify supply lines” to counter China’s dominance in the electric-vehicle market.

• “China has emerged as a global leader in EV production and is spending billions to boost its access to lithium-mine production globally. Meanwhile, it dominates the business of refining lithium extracted elsewhere in the world. The West is trying to catch up.”

What’s next: Last fall, the Department of Energy gave Albermarle a grant of nearly $150 million to produce EV batteries.

• In March, the company said it would spend more than $1.3 billion on a lithium-processing plant in South Carolina.

As banks tighten their lending standards in response to turmoil in the industry, it’s small businesses that are suffering, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: “Some entrepreneurs are finding it more difficult to get a new loan or have had existing credit lines cut. Others report stricter terms, higher borrowing costs, longer waits and tougher questions from their bankers.”

Not your imagination: Close to half of all banks reported having tightened their lending standards in the past three months, according to a Federal Reserve Board survey cited by the Journal.

• “The median interest rate for a variable-rate, small-business term loan was 7.44% in the fourth quarter, the last period for which data is available, up 3.42 percentage points from a year earlier, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Banks have continued to raise rates this year in response to Federal Reserve rate increases,” one source told the newspaper.

​​​​​​​Why it’s important: More stringent loan rules are forcing smaller companies—which tend to borrow from small banks—to put off or cancel expansions and consider bringing in equity investors.

• “‘The alternative to borrowing from your local small bank is another form of financing that is going to be notably more expensive,’ said Goldman Sachs chief U.S. economist David Mericle.”
• Some banks are telling small businesses to seek Small Business Administration loans, which “carry a government guarantee” but tend to have higher interest rates than their conventional counterparts.

The last word: “Manufacturers—particularly small and medium-sized firms—are closely following developments related to access to credit, with an eye on the tightening of lending standards that were occurring even before the recent banking crisis,” said NAM Chief Economist Chad Moutray.

• “Businesses need credit to be able to expand their operations, and any pullback in that access could have consequences.” ​​​​​​​

Manufacturing shed 2,000 jobs in May, the second month of declines for the industry in the past quarter, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

What’s going on: Manufacturing has added just 10,000 workers year to date, a significant slowdown from the 385,000 and 390,000 employees in 2021 and 2022, respectively.

• However … there were 12,984,000 manufacturing employees in May, just shy of the 12,988,000 in February, the highest number in more than 14 years.

Earnings are up: Average hourly wages of production and nonsupervisory employees in the sector increased 0.6%, from $26.03 in April to $26.19 in May.

• Manufacturing wages saw 4.9% growth in the past 12 months, which is an increase from the 4.7% year-over-year growth in April.

The bigger picture: Overall, U.S. employers added 339,000 new workers in May, an increase from April’s 294,000.

• While the U.S. economy has added 1,570,000 workers through the first five months of 2023—a strong pace—the U.S. unemployment rate increased to 3.7% in May from 3.4% in April.

​​​​​​​​​What’s up: The largest employment gains in manufacturing in May occurred in transportation equipment (up 10,500, including 6,800 for motor vehicles and related parts), electrical equipment, appliances and components (up 2,100), primary metals (up 2,000), chemicals (up 1,700), wood products (up 800) and miscellaneous nondurable goods (up 300).

What’s down: The biggest employment declines in the sector in May occurred in furniture and related products (down 4,000), machinery (down 2,400), fabricated metal products (down 2,300), printing and related support activities (down 2,000) and textile mills (down 2,000), among others.

The NAM says: In May “the labor market remained solid, with wages continuing to increase at healthy paces despite some deceleration from the 40-year highs seen last spring,” said NAM Chief Economist Chad Moutray.

As the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission prepares to issue a final rule that would change the way new energy projects connect to the U.S. electrical grid, some are concerned the regulation may be insufficient, according to E&E News’ ENERGYWIRE (subscription).

What’s going on: “Speeding up the grid connection system is critical for the success of the Biden administration’s signature climate initiatives and for many states’ clean energy goals. Today’s protracted process for linking new energy projects to the transmission system is widely considered one of the chief hurdles to deploying more carbon-free energy.”

The problem: Developers of clean energy undertakings and others say FERC’s coming changes likely won’t have the effect of getting new projects online sooner.

• Some policies—such as the direction of regional transmission lines to study interconnection requests in groups, not individually—have already been implemented to little effect, they say.
• And some potential issues slowing grid connection aren’t covered by the regulations, including grid operators’ difficulty in hiring sufficient numbers of experienced engineers to process all the requests.
• Then there are network-upgrade costs, which “are rising sharply” and may not be “meaningfully address[ed]” by FERC’s proposed rule.

Too long a wait: Before being able to deliver power to businesses and households, new energy projects need to be connected to the transmission system—and getting approval for that connection can take years.

• “As of last year, it took an average of five years for a new energy project in the United States to move through that study process and reach commercial operation, according to the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. That’s up from an average of three years in 2015 and less than two years in 2008.”
• What’s more, “[i]n the current interconnection process in most of the United States, projects are sometimes restudied up to 10 times before they’re approved to connect,” one source told ENERGYWIRE.

Prioritizing projects: The proposed regulation tries to prioritize projects by commercial viability and construction readiness to cut down on the number of “possible” projects in the lineup.

• However … some in the renewables industry say “it’s unrealistic to expect project developers to have most of their permits and contracts in place before they have gone through the interconnection process,” another source told the news outlet.

A fundamental change: FERC has its work cut out for it given the foundational changes that have taken place in the U.S. energy system in the past few decades.

• “Historically, the electric grid was dominated by large, centralized power plants. But as the clean energy transition continues,” that is likely to change.

The NAM’s take: “Manufacturers depend on access to reliable and affordable energy to expand—which is why we support reforms that would foster transparent, streamlined and timely federal regulatory processes for the siting, permitting and licensing of energy delivery infrastructure of all types,” said NAM Vice President of Energy and Resources Policy Brandon Farris.

Advanced nuclear reactors got some good news Wednesday when a measure to speed their development and deployment passed the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, according to E&E News’ GREENWIRE.

What’s going on: “The ‘Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act,’ S. 1111, passed 16-3, with Chair Tom Carper (D-Del.) and ranking member Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) leading the effort to revitalize American leadership on nuclear energy.”

What it would mean: Through a series of awards, the bill would encourage companies to develop advanced-reactor technology. In addition, it would seek approval easing for reactor projects on brownfield sites, land that is underused or has been abandoned because of industrial waste.

• “The proposal would also give the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the nation’s chief nuclear regulator, additional authorities to increase hiring. Lawmakers say current staffing is not enough to effectively deal with the high number of applications for new reactors.”
• And it would supplement “early licensing work” to deploy the reactors more quickly “at critical national security infrastructure sites.”

Some manufacturers are reconsidering their dependence on China in the face of growing security concerns and worries about potential military conflicts, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: “Executives are plotting alternate supply chains or devising products that can be made elsewhere should China’s hundreds of thousands of factories become inaccessible. That prospect became more conceivable, they said, after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine prompted companies to sever ties with Russia, sometimes taking huge write-downs.”

• China’s government recently banned key Chinese firms from purchasing products made by U.S. semiconductor firm Micron Technology, saying the company posed a national security risk to China.

Why it’s important: “China’s access to raw materials and ability to produce components for finished goods remains unmatched, and its dense supplier networks have yet to be replicated elsewhere.”

What manufacturers are doing: Some manufacturers that rely heavily on China for revenue and inputs are using extra discretion when it comes to their data and intellectual property in that country.

• Manufacturers’ caution levels have risen since April, when China revised an espionage law that lets its authorities inspect the facilities and electronic equipment of any companies they suspect of spying.
• Some manufacturers are aiming to assemble new supply chains to circumvent China. These companies are “brac[ing] for higher prices and slower service than [they receive] in China” but “won’t be cut off by the threat of war or a trade embargo.”​​​​​​​

The bill passed in the House Wednesday to raise the nation’s debt limit and avert a default makes some of the most significant revisions to U.S. environmental law in years, “potentially accelerating new renewable-energy investments championed by the Biden administration,” according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: The Fiscal Responsibility Act, which boosts the U.S. debt ceiling until after the 2024 presidential election and now heads to the Senate, includes several energy infrastructure-related moves.

• Expedites permitting for MVP: The legislation hastens permitting for the Mountain Valley Pipeline, an Appalachian natural-gas project that would bring affordable energy to the Mid- and South Atlantic regions.
• Shortens timelines: It also “tightens the scope of environmental reviews required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 and allows more projects to win approval without having to undergo the most complex types of reviews. It also sets time limits of no more than two years to complete the studies.”
• Streamlines processes: In addition, the bill assigns review of each project to one federal agency rather than multiple agencies and allows infrastructure undertakings “to piggyback on existing reviews for similar projects rather than starting from scratch.”

“Unlocking resources”: Rep. Garret Graves (R-LA), who joined NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons at the recent NAM Competing to Win Tour stop in Harahan, Louisiana, and who wrote a previous measure from which the Fiscal Responsibility Act drew, said the legislation is “all about unlocking America’s resources.” This is a point the NAM has long stressed to Congress, too.

• On Tuesday, after the NAM consistently applied pressure on lawmakers to reach a deal, Timmons urged the House to pass the measure, citing its ability “[t]o strengthen manufacturing in our nation, reach our industry’s full potential and outcompete other nations like China” through permitting reforms.
• Bureaucracy and red tape hamstring plans for critical infrastructure, resulting in “yearslong delays on energy projects, making them unfeasible. The most rigorous type of review takes an average of 4½ years to complete, according to the White House,” the Journal reports.

Something we can all agree on: “‘We see an enormous amount of demand for new clean energy projects that are being held up,’ said Sasha Mackler, who directs the energy program at the Bipartisan Policy Center. ‘That reality has brought Republicans and Democrats together here.’”

How will AI change the work you and your employees do? The Manufacturing Leadership Council—the digital transformation arm of the NAM—is helping manufacturing leaders figure out the opportunities created by new generative AI technologies, including ChatGPT.

Recently, the MLC held a Decision Compass discussion to help manufacturers learn how to take advantage of these new tools safely and effectively.

The participants: The conversation was led by two members of West Monroe’s Center of Excellence for AI: Ryan Elmore and David McGraw. Elmore and McGraw shared their expertise and addressed questions from manufacturers throughout the call.

The use cases: AI is a diverse and complex tool that is likely to have a lasting impact on manufacturers across the United States. According to McGraw and Elmore, there are a range of applications for the technology, from supply chain optimization and production planning to predictive maintenance issues.

The workforce impact: According to Elmore, AI will also transform the manufacturing workforce.

• Some roles that involve repetitive tasks like data processing could be adjusted or eliminated, while some new jobs will be created around tasks like prompt engineering, which ensures AI programs deliver the most useful and accurate results. Most importantly, however, existing jobs will likely be modified to account for new tools.
• “Some are going to go away, some are going to be created, but the vast majority is going to change mentality, change infrastructure, change the way we work,” said Elmore.

Learn more: Want to find out more about how digital tools are changing manufacturing? The MLC will delve deeper into these issues at this year’s Rethink Summit, taking place June 26–28 in Marco Island, Florida. Learn more and register here.

Read the full story here.

The NAM is leading a coalition of business groups in advocating against a potential new overtime rule from the Department of Labor.

The background: The current overtime rule, part of the Fair Labor Standards Act, mandates that employees must receive overtime pay of at least time and a half for hours worked over 40 in a workweek.

• However, it contains certain exemptions for white-collar workers. If an employee makes a minimum amount of money or is classified as an executive, administrator or professional, they are exempt from overtime pay.

The new rule: The new rule is expected to raise the salary threshold from the current $35,568 per year.

• ​​​​​​​The change would potentially cause challenges for employers, as well as for employees who have worked to advance themselves away from hourly jobs and into salaried company positions, as the NAM has long argued.
• In addition, the widespread adoption of hybrid work brought about by the pandemic “makes compliance with potential changes to the white-collar exemptions measurably more difficult,” the coalition pointed out. New regulations may force employers to restrict these work arrangements that many workers value highly.

The last word: As the coalition told the Department of Labor, “Many businesses are not well-positioned to absorb new labor costs associated with changes to the overtime pay regulations, and such changes would only exacerbate the difficulties businesses are currently facing”—including inflation, supply chain disruptions and the aftereffects of the pandemic.