Thank you, Mr. Chairman and honourable members of the committee.
I am the director of the Critical Materials Institute, usually known as CMI, which is a lot easier. We're a research organization funded by the U.S. Department of Energy.
CMI has its headquarters at Ames Laboratory, in Ames, Iowa. The Ames lab is a national lab operated for the Department of Energy under contract by the Iowa State University of Science and Technology. I mention this because it establishes my relationship to the U.S. government, which is contractual. I perform work for the government, but I am not an employee of the government. I do not represent the U.S. government, and my comments today do not represent U.S. policy in any way.
I am here to provide my personal views and opinions, hopefully with the benefit of some modicum of technical expertise. That said, I am very honoured to have been asked to testify.
The Critical Materials Institute was established by DOE in June 2013, just a little more than half a year ago, as an energy innovation hub, in response to disruptions in the supply chains for certain chemical elements used in the manufacture of clean energy systems.
The need for the Critical Materials Institute is perceived as being urgent. The Department of Energy had planned to switch over the production of lighting systems for industrial-scale buildings to a next generation technology over a specific period of time, and it has been forced to extend that period of time by two years because of the lack of europium and terbium to make the new more highly efficient lighting. In the United States we have 33,000 or so wind turbines in operation producing electricity for the national grid with less than 1% of those using direct-drive technology, which is enabled by high-strength neodymium-iron-boron-dysprosium magnets. The reason we have such a poor representation of those turbines is the lack of the supply chain.... The direct-drive units are more efficient and more reliable than the alternatives which use gear boxes, so we have a need today to solve the problem of the lack of rare earths.
In 2010-11 the prices of rare earths spiked to levels never seen before. We now refer to materials like those generically as critical materials. Rare earth elements in general have very unique properties that allow them to be used in such things as the creation of high-performance magnets and highly efficient light sources. They are used as catalysts in the production of petrochemicals, and they have several other important technological uses. There are no easy substitutes for them in most of their applications. In 2010, 97% of the world’s supply of all rare earths came from China. They are the very definition of what we mean by critical material today.
CMI is funded at the level of $120 million U.S. over five years. Its mission is to eliminate materials criticality as an impediment to commercialization of clean energy technologies like high efficiency lighting, wind turbines, and many others for today and tomorrow. We have research capabilities at a network of institutions in the United States, including four national labs, seven universities, and seven private sector corporations. We use advanced networking tools to operate effectively as a single institution.
We closely follow the critical materials strategy issued by the Department of Energy in 2011. We address five of the rare earth elements, neodymium, europium, terbium, dysprosium, and yttrium, and two other elements that are designated as near critical for clean energy purposes, lithium and tellurium.
We seek to supply the supply chains of these critical materials in three ways: first, by developing, demonstrating, and deploying technologies that diversify and expand the availability of these materials throughout their supply chains; second, by reducing waste of these materials through increased manufacturing efficiency and recycling; and third, by reducing demand through the identification of substitute materials for the critical materials in specific applications.
In all three areas, the needs of U.S. clean energy systems drive CMI's research agenda, driven specifically by the needs of the U.S. manufacturing industry. From its very outset, every project we sponsor has a commercialization plan.
I would note that with the recommissioning of Molycorp's mine at Mountain Pass in California, the U.S. is a producer, a consumer, and also a disposer of rare earths, as it is for other critical materials, and CMI accordingly has research efforts that focus on all parts of the materials supply chain.
We have begun work on 35 separate individual projects, each of which is intended to solve a particular problem or create a specific opportunity at selected points in the supply chain. While these are our day-to-day focus, we also recognize two grand challenges or issues that overarch all of our efforts, and there are five associated needs for long-term materials supply security.
As indicated at the outset, time is our major challenge. We have issues today, and if it takes 10 years to start a mine—I'm told that's an optimistic number in most cases—and 20 years to invent a new material, as it frequently does, time is a big challenge. Materials criticality often emerges in a matter of months, while solutions take decades or, at best, years. We need to have a better opportunity to anticipate which materials will go critical and we need an increased speed of response.
Specific to the rare earths, there are three critical needs. Rare earths are among the most difficult elements in the world to process and the hardest to do without. They rank at the top of everybody's list of critical elements today. Almost every country now has its own list of critical elements. Some are long and some are short, but right at the top of all of them are many of the rare earths. The difficulty of working with them and the difficulty of working around them contribute to this.
There are three particular needs that we see.
Two of them are very technical and are related to production. The first of those is separating the rare earth elements. There is no facility in North America that is capable of separating rare earth elements when they are pulled out of the ground by mining. The second critical need is converting separated rare earth oxides to metal, which is the process normally described as smelting. Again, there is no facility in North America that currently has this capability and is in production.
Third, and much more fundamentally, there is a real need to understand the fundamental science of the rare earths. There are fundamental issues about the way the 4f electron works. I'm not going to go into what that means, but it's in order to enable us to actually understand how they work, to understand their chemistry better, to develop better tools to separate them, and to convert them from oxides to metal and actually develop substitutes.
CMI has a large budget by the standards of government research programs. It's one of the largest projects in the United States today. It consequently garners a great deal of attention, but in fact, the resources allocated to us are really quite lean in comparison to the scale of the problem we've been given to solve. We're looking at every part of the supply chain, not just mining. Especially the funding is short when we consider the time scale that we have to work in. We have funds for five years, and we are addressing problems that have traditionally taken 10 to 20 years to solve, so we're working very hard.
We actively follow developments in technologies and markets that impact our mission, and we make adjustments to our projects as appropriate. We triage our projects on almost a daily basis.
We also seek opportunities to leverage our resources in ways that allow us to meet our goals in shorter times or at lower costs through collaboration with other organizations. We actively seek opportunities to work together with others within the United States and elsewhere to meet the needs of today.
Prices of the rare earths have receded since the crisis levels of late 2011, but at CMI we do not see price per se as a good indicator of criticality.
Criticality is, rather, the result of the importance of an element in its particular application, and the rare earths are really important. You cannot do without them. If you want to have a smart phone of any kind, you need rare earths, or you need to carry a phone that won't be very smart and will be the size of a brick. Many other technologies are similarly affected.
The first issue is the importance of these elements to our modern technologies, and the second is the security of the supply chain. These fundamental issues remain in place for the rare earths. They are still critical in many applications. There is still a fundamental lack of control of the supply chain of the rare earths, and we believe that the current low prices are liable to change rapidly and unpredictably, depending on market conditions and on the actions of other governments around the world.
CMI researchers are working very hard to reduce the critical need for the rare earths, their essential function in many technologies, and also to improve the supply chain. We're seeking to develop the tools necessary to address other elements that might become critical in the future. We believe, by the way, that there will be future examples of materials criticality at probably an elevated rate from what we've seen in the past. In particular, we believe there is still an urgent need to secure the rare earth supply chain.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for your attention. I'd be happy to try to answer your questions.