First is that advanced batteries and electric vehicles are not the product of government policy.  They are the product of fundamental changes in energy and automotive technologies that will continue regardless of political leadership.  Government policy cannot affect the existence of this change (though it can affect its pace).  Politics will not prevent the adoption of a superior technology by U.S. businesses and consumers.  As long as we in industry keep our eye on the ball, no change in government policy will cripple our industry.  And the ball is: better, cheaper, faster.

Second, there is a difference between politics and policy.  Modern EV’s, which are still a new and relatively expensive technology, make a great punching bag for a political coalition marketing itself to hard-pressed blue-collar workers.  My guess is that Henry Ford took political heat in the early 20^th Century from politicians representing the vast majority of U.S. voters, who could not yet afford his products.  But Henry Ford got his costs down and ended up doing just fine.

Third, a new approach to some of the challenges of the advanced battery industry in the United States might prove refreshing, and perhaps even beneficial.  Everyone who runs a business appreciates the prime importance of efficiency.  A new focus on efficiency could be beneficial to all good businesses in our industry.

Focusing on the fundamental needs of business in the battery industry could be even more beneficial.  As I have long observed, every business has two problems: a balance sheet problem and an income statement problem.  Over the last four years the federal government has provided necessary and invaluable assistance to many of our members in solving their balance sheet problem.  If the next Administration chooses to focus more on the income statement problem, our industry could benefit as well.

Finally, China.  I have written previously in this blog that we need a new approach to China.  What that approach needs to be and what issues that approach needs to cover go well beyond batteries.  While I will not weigh in on the wisdom of across the board tariffs on everything made in China (and everywhere else), it strikes me that a deal needs to be cut with the Chinese.   Because of the peculiarities of U.S. politics, it needed to be Nixon who went to China.  McGovern could never have done it.  So let’s see what happens in 2025.

I do not wish to discount the apprehension in our industry or to be overly Pollyannaish.  The advanced battery industry received unprecedented moral and financial support over the last four years, which it badly needed.  It may be that we will not have that level of support over the next two to four years.  But the future is far from bleak.  We have a strong technology wind at our back.  The best days of the advanced battery, EV and renewable energy industries lay before us, not behind.  Let’s just keep charging ahead.

NAATBatt’s core mission is to promote the development, commercialization and manufacture of advanced battery technology in North America.  No organization has been more concerned about the growing concentration of lithium battery supplies and manufacturing in China than has NAATBatt.  And no organization has been more active in seeking ways for North American companies to compete more effectively in the growing lithium battery industry.

But however the market has arrived at its current state, North American manufacturers must respond to the current situation realistically.  It is one thing to try to grow domestic capacity.  That we must continue to do, and we need to do it in a number of different ways.  But it is another thing to cut ourselves off entirely from Chinese companies and Chinese supplies.  That makes no sense and will ultimately undermine the goal of creating a robust domestic advanced battery supply chain.

One of the first things we need to do is re-engage with the Chinese scientific community.  There was a time when that community was small, insignificant and sometimes rightly suspected of trying to acquire North American intellectual property not always by honorable means.  But that time has passed.  Today, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation reports that Chinese institutions account for 65.4 percent of the high-impact research publications in electric batteries, substantially outpacing U.S. institutions’ 11.9 percent.  Chinese entities’ global share of patents in the field of electric propulsion increased from 2.4 percent in 2010 to 26.9 percent in 2020, again substantially outpacing the share coming out of North America.

The greatest long-term threat to building a robust and sustainable advanced battery supply chain in North America is the loss of scientific and innovation leadership.  North American governments and scientists need to work hard to get that leadership back.  But cutting ourselves off from leading innovative companies such as CATL rather than trying to learn from them is not a path to leadership.  It is a path to long-term, second-rate status.

We need a new approach to China in the battery and electric vehicle industries.  While we need to be mindful of possible threats and smart about how we mitigate those threats, simply cutting ourselves off from Chinese supplies, Chinese science and Chinese business leaders is not a smart strategy.  We need to start thinking hard about how we do better.