6
Advanced Manufacturing and the Climate Crisis: Changes and Opportunities
The climate crisis and efforts to combat it will have profound implications for U.S. advanced manufacturing. Climate policy will fundamentally reshape markets, from agriculture to transportation. Moreover, the technological innovation required to meet climate goals could make U.S. manufacturing firms more, not less, competitive. The sixth workshop session explored these changes and opportunities across a range of sectors. Anna Goldstein, University of Massachusetts, and Henry Kelly, Boston University, moderated the session. Goldstein briefly described the necessity of advancement in today’s manufacturing system to meet the challenges of the future. In his framing remarks, Peter F. Green, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), outlined the products and processes requiring innovative design and manufacturing solutions across multiple sectors. Mary Maxon, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), described the immense potential of the U.S. bioeconomy to add to the solution set for manufacturing. John Wall, Cummins (retired), emphasized the importance of collaboration with industry across the entire innovation pipeline. Catherine Woteki, Iowa State University, spoke about the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s role in the clean energy future through research and incentive programs.
ANNA GOLDSTEIN
Senior Research Fellow, Director of Energy Transition Initiative, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
In order to put emissions into a structural decline and meet climate targets, the United States needs a massive scale-up of manufacturing clean energy technologies, began Goldstein. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) role in advanced manufacturing falls into two categories. The first is increasing efficiency and decreasing emissions in today’s manufacturing processes, including in hard-to-electrify sectors, like heavy industry, and in food and agriculture. The second is ramping up production of new products and industries, like batteries for grid-scale storage. This requires rapid innovation, which introduces major challenges and opportunities. Enhancing manufacturing capabilities, for example, will allow us to build resilient supply chains and stimulate economic growth—two areas that have become increasingly urgent in the COVID-19 crisis.
PETER F. GREEN
Deputy Laboratory Director for Science,
Technology and Chief Research Officer,
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
To achieve aggressive deep decarbonization goals while maintaining economic competitiveness, the future advanced power system must be resilient, secure, cost effective, and multifunctional and must provide a diverse range of services to sophisticated customers, said Green. This system will be enabled by new advanced energy technologies and manufacturing strategies, driven by foundational research and innovation.
Green first described pathways to a low-carbon energy system that would meet these requirements. As global energy consumption continues to increase, renewables will make increasingly prominent contributions. Wind and solar generation costs have decreased significantly during the past decade, achieving cost parity with generation from fossil sources, and will continue to decrease. The electric power sector is projected to account for the majority of primary energy consumption in 2040. Many strategies exist to electrify the commercial, residential, industrial, and transportation sectors, although Green acknowledged that the transportation sector will pose the most challenges and opportunities. Regardless, solar energy and wind contributions must increase into the terawatt range (Figure 6.1). This will require scientific advances and new innovations in design and manufacturing. With the power generation capacity expansions, the principles
of a circular economy for materials must be adopted, in order to minimize waste and the use of landfills, said Green.
In addition to power generation from nonfossil sources, there are a variety of strategies available to reduce CO2 emissions, including carbon capture, storage, and utilization. For example, reducing CO2 electrochemically and the subsequent synthesis of chemicals, low-carbon fuels (for energy storage), and other materials are active and impactful areas of research. Other strategies involve decreasing cost and energy intensity and increasing efficiency of manufacturing processes through strategies that include additive manufacturing, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. Materials substitution also will be necessary to replace materials such as lithium and cobalt, which are not abundant yet are currently integral components of the ubiquitous lithium-ion batteries, for example.
Green transitioned to speak about the research needed to successfully establish future low-carbon energy systems. The power system of the future must provide significant functionality to accommodate emerging technologies, including millions of interconnected devices, electric vehicles, smart homes and communities, sensors, and the internet of things. It must also operate efficiently with high levels of variable and distributed energy resources. These changes will be highly transformational to the current power system, with the increased emphasis on local power generation, instead of large centralized conventional synchronous power generation, and multidirectional flow of energy (Figure 6.2).
The next generation of buildings will be connected, intelligent, and efficient, with flexible demand that can be controlled in synergy with time and spatially variant electricity generation, Green stated. To achieve this future, further research is required in the areas of materials performance, including thermal storage, communications, forecasting, and real-time control of assets.
In the area of transportation, Green stated there are many opportunities and challenges. For example, research areas include longer life and safer batteries, higher-power fast-charging systems, wireless charging, as well as hydrogen production (for fuel cells and industrial processes) integrated with the grid.
DOE has advanced renewable energy solutions via management and funding of a variety of academic-national laboratory-industry collaborative interactions, said Green. The National Science Foundation (NSF) and DOE’s basic energy sciences program have been critical in the advancement of foundational science, leading to innovations in materials and processes, efficiencies, cost reductions, and advanced manufacturing strategies. Future enabling activities are needed to address the most sophisticated challenges yet to be confronted. To do this, Green concluded, the United States needs creative funding mechanisms that advance low-carbon solutions and supply chains. He also highlighted the importance of coordinated national portfolios and regional innovation centers.
MARY MAXON
Associate Laboratory Director for Biosciences, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Maxon began by describing the opportunities for biology to advance manufacturing. The U.S. bioeconomy has a billion dry tons of sustainable biomass with the potential to produce 25 percent of transportation fuels, 50 billion pounds of biobased chemicals and bioproducts, and the capability to reduce CO2 emissions by 450 million tons. Biological building
blocks can be brought together in purposeful units of utility—genes and circuits—to re-engineer cells and plants as factories for biological manufacturing, explained Maxon. These cellular factories take advantage of the design-build-test-learn cycle of engineering to create biofuels, bioproducts, and other consumer goods.
DOE’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research funds four Bioenergy Research Centers (BRCs). In partnership with six national laboratories and six universities, one of these BRCs, the Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI), is focused on establishing scientific knowledge and new technologies to transform the maximum amount of carbon in bioenergy crops into biofuels and bioproducts. In the first 10 years, JBEI’s research program reduced the cost of biofuel from $300,000/gallon to $35/gallon. To become competitive with conventional fuel, the cost must approach $2.50/gallon. This will require more research into interventions at various points in the development pathway to continue to drive cost reductions (Figure 6.3).
To realize the full promise of biomanufacturing, Maxon said that it will be important to enhance partnership between DOE and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Some valuable connections are already present, but further opportunity exists for collaboration on biofuels, bioenergy crops, and biological carbon capture in plants and soils. Federal procurement of certified biobased products through the USDA BioPreferred program provides certainty for new markets, helping to drive costs down. She also advocated for the establishment of more biofoundry platform infrastructure. The Agile Biofoundry is a good start, but it cannot keep up with industry demand, indicating the opportunity for expansion. In addition, Maxon listed the development of smart bioreactors equipped with next-generation sensors and real-time machine learning to adjust reactors to drive productivity of biomanufacturing. Last, Maxon said that flexible feedstock systems are needed. Internationally, experiments with waste as carbon sources are being used to manufacture a variety of bioproducts. For example, cheese and whey waste in Ireland is being used for polylactic acid in bioplastic, and waste gas fermentation is being used in Belgium for ethanol. These represent just a sample of biomanufacturing opportunities awaiting the United States.
JOHN C. WALL
Chief Technical Officer (Retired), Cummins
Wall began with three lessons learned from industry regarding the advancement and success of innovative technology solutions. First, as in other sectors, the establishment of a complete ecosystem to support
innovation from basic research to commercial products was critical in the diesel engine emissions space, said Wall. Second, the adoption of emissions technologies is not typically driven by their low emissions properties but rather because the technology has greater value for the customer compared to previous products. Therefore, research and development (R&D) must focus on both the environmental impact and potential customers. Third, investments in research from DOE were very important. Cummins’s strategy of early engagement with innovators proved beneficial in developing application-specific technologies, and a significant number of U.S. manufacturing jobs were created as low-emissions technologies were converted to commercial products.
Given this model, Wall described how DOE can catalyze similar systems around clean energy innovation. DOE’s Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) enhances the link between technology innovation and manufacturing. However, AMO is an enabler and not a substitute for direct connection with industry, Wall said. Industry collaboration is critical across all DOE programs—not just manufacturing—in order to create a robust ecosystem. Consider decarbonization for transportation: At a minimum, broad electrification of transportation will require grid-scale, cost-effective storage and new cross-sector linkages across the power and transportation sector. Areas not compatible with electric or hydrogen corridors, such as long-haul trucks and legacy vehicles, will require alternative liquid fuels. To enable this, crosscutting linkages must be forged across DOE, USDA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and related industries; the framing of advanced manufacturing also needs to broaden from its focus on mechanical engineering to also include chemical and biological processing. If not a full reorganization of DOE, Wall advocated for at least a strengthening of DOE’s matrix management structures to eliminate conflicts, duplication, and gaps, and to facilitate and reinforce cross-sector interconnections and collaboration.
CATHERINE WOTEKI
Professor of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Iowa State University
There has been multidecadal bipartisan support for research on biofuels, bioenergy, and new products from agricultural commodities in both Congress and administrations, began Woteki. The current administration has an agricultural innovation agenda with two objectives. The first is to achieve net reductions in the agricultural sector’s carbon footprint by 2050 utilizing carbon sequestration and renewable energy. The second objective is to achieve market-driven blend rates of E15 in 2030 and E30 in 2050, by increasing biofuel feedstock production and achieving market-driven
demand for biomass and biodiesel. The administration has also articulated its research priorities in the 2020 USDA Science Blueprint.1 These priorities include sustainably intensifying agriculture production, assisting agriculture in adaptation to climate change, and developing new value-added innovations from agricultural products. The USDA Science Blueprint describes ways to reach those goals and research priorities through USDA intramural and extramural programs, including the Sun Grant Initiative.
Woteki transitioned to describing the incentive, loan, and grant programs that USDA utilizes to advance innovation. Established under the Farm Bill in 2002 as a spur for new markets for bioproducts, the BioPreferred Program requires federal agencies to choose biobased products in making acquisitions. Currently, there are more than 12,000 products listed within the federal program, and 900 additional products that carry voluntary labeling. The program has been an effective way to provide a market for these products until they gain a broader public market, she said. Additionally, Rural Development Energy loans provide greater certainty to farmers and small businesses looking to get into the clean energy area.
The Biomass Research and Development (BR&D) Initiative is the key mechanism for coordinating research, development, and technology transfer activities, said Woteki. The BR&D board is co-chaired by USDA and DOE. The technical advisory committee is an independent body comprised of members from industry, academia, nonprofits, and local government who provide input regarding the technical focus and direction of the initiative. The initiative awards competitive grants to projects that integrate science and engineering research in feedstock development, biofuels and biobased products, and biofuels development analysis.
DISCUSSION
Following the speakers’ remarks, Goldstein and Kelly moderated a discussion session that covered industry engagement, regionality and scale, organizational structures, growth and recovery, the circular economy, and agricultural opportunities.
Industry Engagement
Goldstein asked the panelists to comment on the most important thing that the federal government can do to enable new manufacturing processes to move quickly from research institutions into practice. Green responded that technology must be adaptive to various applications and
___________________
1 USDA Science Blueprint: A Roadmap for USDA Science from 2020 to 2025, 2020, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-science-blueprint.pdf.
sectors. This requires government funding, enabling early engagement with industry. Wall agreed that links with industry early on are important to align the right technology with the right application. Engaging with industry also helps in identifying which technologies have potential and which technologies will not succeed. “If everything you are trying works, you are not casting your net broadly enough,” said Wall.
Regionality and Scale
Woteki described the role of regionalization in sourcing biomass and urged the consideration of the implications of regional differences for bioproducts. Kelly asked how to scale biological processes to address decarbonization in the chemical and petrochemical sector. Maxon answered that creating certainties in markets through biomanufacturing and procurement reduces the investment risk. Combining concepts of regionality, feedstocks, and equity, Maxon described the importance of access to fermentation capabilities. Distributed, collaborative, biomanufacturing infrastructure does not exist in the United States, and subsequently many promising companies conduct their fermentation in Europe. Creating regional centers for distributed biomanufacturing enables scale while addressing the distributed nature of biomass. Woteki added that while the USDA’s work does emphasize regionalization, loan programs and additional authoring legislation may be able to further contribute.
Organizational Structure
Asked to comment on the top priorities for reorganization within DOE, Wall drew on the matrix management model. He described how matrix management takes advantage of the strong capabilities historically siloed into distinct disciplines by sharing those employees and resources across functions. Wall suggested that DOE apply a similar model, involving the development of experts in their respective fields, and then bringing them together in an integrated team working toward a clearly defined goal. Green agreed that there is opportunity for valuable cross-collaborations within DOE, such as between Basic Energy Sciences and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. He added that reorganization of DOE would require many incentives to program managers to continue to render creative and enthusiastic outcomes.
Kelly pointed out that DOE’s offices are currently structured in such a way that emerging forms of energy, such as alternative and synthetic fuels, do not neatly fit into a single office. New developments provide DOE with the opportunity to assess its long-term goals and strategies independent of the current way of operating, said Green.
Growth and Recovery
In the context of the COVID-19 crisis, Goldstein asked how the United States could harness its vast science and technology infrastructure for economic growth and recovery. Maxon replied that, under current safety restrictions, much of the scientific and research workforce can no longer operate as it once did. As a result, growth goals may shift as the U.S. scientific enterprise evolves. Thinking long term, Woteki added that new policy directions and legislation should not center just on the economy but should also consider sustainability and health. She encouraged both federal and state actions that drive toward a more sustainable economy while also stimulating job creation.
The COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated the need for more resilient supply chains, observed Wall. Establishing robust supply chains through advancement of U.S. manufacturing presents an opportunity for job creation. However, U.S. labor rates are considerably higher than they are in many other countries. To compensate, the nation must significantly advance the efficiency and effectiveness of manufacturing processes, Wall explained. He expressed that AMO’s workforce development activities will be key, but this will also require new policies to support domestic manufacturing and supply chains.
Circular Economy
Thinking about plastics and petrochemicals, Kelly asked about the possibility of biomanufacturing products that are highly durable but still possess the properties of a circular economy. Green said that many advancements are emerging around new technologies to advance plastics recycling and up-cycling. The DOE consortium Bio-Optimized Technologies to Keep Thermoplastics Out of Landfills and the Environment (BOTTLE) seeks to engage with industry and research organizations to spur early-stage R&D in this area. Two DOE Energy Frontier Research Centers support multimillion-dollar programs pursuing new concepts to enable plastics recycling.
Wall touched on the circular economy as it relates to design and manufacturing of vehicle components. Designing with the goal of reuse of major engine components has been a well-established practice at Cummins for many years. Batteries recyclability is an emerging challenge that will require additional research and development, said Wall.
Agricultural Opportunities
Asked about areas of productive overlap between agriculture and clean energy, Woteki mentioned the Advanced Research
Projects Agency–Energy’s (ARPA-E’s) TERRA program developing new phenotyping systems to determine a plant’s genetic potential. Also funded by ARPA-E, the ROOTS program seeks to develop advanced technologies that enable more robust roots systems for increased carbon sequestration in annual crops. These ARPA-E funded technologies, in turn, are being brought into USDA’s research activities. Woteki pointed out that this hand-off between USDA and DOE occurs relatively informally on a programmatic level. She expressed her view that formal coordination mechanisms are better suited for bigger, ongoing projects such as the Biomass Research and Development Initiative.