[Senate Hearing 118-215]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-215
IMPROVING CAPACITY FOR CRITICAL MINERAL
RECOVERY THROUGH ELECTRONIC WASTE
RECYCLING AND REUSE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 26, 2023
__________
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
54-562 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Ranking Member
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
MARK KELLY, Arizona DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
ALEX PADILLA, California LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
Courtney Taylor, Democratic Staff Director
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
JULY 26, 2023
OPENING STATEMENTS
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 1
Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West
Virginia....................................................... 3
WITNESSES
Kochhar, Ajay, President, CEO, and Co-Founder, Li-Cycle.......... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Boswell, Craig, P.E., President and Co-Founder, HOBI
International, Incorporated.................................... 18
Prepared statement........................................... 20
Responses to additional questions from Senator Carper........ 34
McIlroy, Kitty, Project Manager, Northeast Maryland Waste
Disposal Authority............................................. 37
[Due to size constraints Ms. McIlroy's prepared statement is
not included in this hearing record but is available on the
govinfo.gov Web site. The live, online link is https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-118hhrg54562/pdf/CHRG-
118hhrg54562-add1.pdf]
Pellicane, Charles, Executive Vice President, Business
Development and Operations, Human-I-T.......................... 39
Prepared statement........................................... 41
IMPROVING CAPACITY FOR CRITICAL MIN-
ERAL RECOVERY THROUGH ELECTRONIC
WASTE RECYCLING AND REUSE
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 26, 2023
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R. Carper
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Carper, Capito, Kelly, Sullivan, and
Ricketts.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. Now let's proceed, if we could, to the
morning's hearing.
Now I call up our panel of witnesses.
Please take your seats.
Good morning. Great to see you all. Thanks so much for
joining us.
Ajay Kochhar, Craig Boswell, Kitty McIlroy, and Charles
Pellicane. Thank you all for your willingness to join us today
as we discuss what I think is an increasingly important topic,
and that is electronic waste.
What do we mean by electronic waste? Electronic waste, or
e-waste, as many call it, consists of various electronic
products, including televisions, including home appliances, and
batteries. These electronics are created using valuable
materials, as you know, such as nickel, which can be and should
be recycled.
As some of you also know, recycling has been a lifelong
passion of a number of us on this Committee, including me. I
think I have recycled just about everything from a Ford
Explorer, we called it affectionately the Ford Exploder. It
used to be my wife's vehicle, passed down to our son
Christopher, passed down to Ben, and I finally took it without
telling my wife one day, it was about 15 years old, took it to
a place and had it recycled. They gave me a check for like
$900, and this was Martha's car. I never told her about the
$900. Please keep it quiet.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. I have recycled just about everything,
including a dehumidifier, which I thought was my all time
favorite thing to recycle. Doing so benefits our environment as
well as our economy, as well as our basement, providing some
more extra room in our basement and garage, and is a win-win
for the Carper family and I suspect a win-win for a lot of
other families, too.
Unfortunately, our current systems don't always make it
easy to recycle e-waste. Each year, around 50 million tons of
electronic waste are discarded in landfills globally, valued at
an estimated, get this, an estimated $62.5 billion. That is
billion with a B.
These figures don't include the electronic waste, such as
old smartphones and old computers, that often remain in our
homes collecting dust long after we stop using them. In
addition to their lost value, the electronics that end up in
landfills often leach toxic chemicals into the soil,
threatening the health and well being of nearby communities.
So, how did we get here, and what are we going to do about
it? Several factors have contributed to the growing problem of
pollution from e-waste. First, consumer demand, alongside rapid
technological innovation, has led to a steady increase in the
production of new electronics. Sadly, our ability to make use
of the rare materials contained within discarded e-waste hasn't
kept pace with this production.
In addition, insufficient domestic e-waste recycling
standards, limited recycling infrastructure, and a lack of
education have furthered our growing electronic waste dilemma.
Many producers have contributed to this problem as well,
creating barriers to repairing devices by limiting the
availability of parts, tools, and information needed to keep
things working. This forced scarcity drives up the consumption
of new products.
Fortunately, the adversities of e-waste also present us
with some clear opportunities. For example, recycling
electronics at the end of their useful life allows for the
recovery of critical minerals, such as nickel, such as cobalt.
Both are important components, as you know, of electric
vehicles, solar panels, and other clean energy technologies.
Improving e-waste recycling would help us reach our climate
goals, while also reducing our reliance on foreign sources for
critical earth minerals.
In addition, taking proper care of our electronic waste is
vital to national security, as it ensures adequate supply
chains and prevents the loss of sensitive information through
digital files.
Today, we are interested in learning more about the role
that the Federal Government can and should play in e-waste
recycling. This includes the creation of standards that shore
up our supply chains and protect human health and our
environment.
That being said, the companies that create electronic waste
must also take greater responsibility for reducing waste and
recycling their products. We are already beginning to see
innovation in this space.
As we will hear today, Li-Cycle is pioneering battery
recycling technology that allows us to recapture critical
minerals. In addition, Human-I-T is employing refurbishment
techniques that extend the life of electronic products.
From experience, we know that when industry, environmental
groups, and all levels of government join forces to address our
environmental challenges, we all benefit. As co-chair of the
Senate Recycling Caucus with Senator Boozman and with Senator
Capito and others, I know that most Americans want to do the
right thing when it comes to e-waste disposal. Still, they are
often unsure of where to go, or frankly, how to do it.
Unfortunately, many municipalities either don't accept
electronic waste through curbside recycling programs or they
don't offer e-waste recycling at all. Consumers are limited to
manufacturer take back programs or have no option but to put
their waste electronics in the trash.
We now have an opportunity to improve e-waste recycling,
and I believe we are. In the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and
the Inflation Reduction Act, we included funding to develop
battery recycling technology and best practices, as well as to
improve public education and recycling infrastructure. These
investments are a starting point to help increase electronic
recycling rates.
In addition, the Recycling and Composting Accountability
Act, legislation that I introduced with Senator Capito and with
Senator Boozman and that this Committee advanced unanimously in
April, would take a close look at where materials are being
lost from circularity. This critical information could help
improve how we recycle electronics.
Let me close by again thanking our witnesses for joining us
in our efforts to improve electronics recycling. Today, we hope
to hear your thoughts on how we can improve our efforts to
establish a circular economy for electronic waste. Together, I
am confident that we can rise to the gravity of this challenge,
and as we say in Delaware, seize the day, or Carper diem.
With that, let me turn it over to our Ranking Member,
Senator Capito, for her opening remarks.
There is a lot going on in the Senate today, and there is a
lot going on for members of this Committee. I am supposed to be
in the Judiciary Committee introducing a guy running to be a
Federal judge in just a few minutes, so I will be going back
and forth. But I am leaving this Committee in very able hands,
and I will rejoin you as quickly as I can.
Thank you all for coming in and for working with us on this
very, very important issue.
Senator Capito.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you all for being here with us today.
A lot of my statement is going to mirror a lot of what the
Chairman has said in his statement, because I think most
Americans who are listening to this are going to have the same
kind of echoing, what are we going to do here, because we all
have that issue. We are talking about end of life management of
electronic waste in the United States.
Too often, we pay too little mind, we put it in the
basement or in the attic, to the mounting volume of electronic
waste generated in our lives. Whether it is the dusty boxes of
old phones, laptops, and cords sitting in our closets, or
improperly throwing electronic waste in our curbside trash
bins, it is an issue we quickly dismiss for being out of sight,
out of mind.
There are two misconceptions that I would like to
highlight. The first is that managing our electronic waste is
an issue for a later date. This is an outgrowth of the poorly
developed collection infrastructure that we have in place. This
often limits electronic waste disposal to only the most engaged
people willing to visit a dump or a drop off facility.
The second misconception is that our electronic waste is
somebody else's problem once we throw it away. This stems from
the dismal state of consumer awareness and education.
For example, it is far too difficult for the average person
to understand when a product is, or is not, considered
electronic waste. I have actually run into this issue myself.
Further, many people are unaware that electronic waste
should not be commingled with our usual household trash. This
is an issue that has become too large to ignore.
The EPA determined that electronic waste is the fastest
growing segment of the waste stream, both in the United States
and around the world. Last year, some of the statistics the
Chairman stated I will restate: An estimated 5.3 billion mobile
phones were discarded worldwide, either thrown away, or taken
out of service or shoveled into a drawer or box.
That tally helped contribute to the more than 50 million
tons of electronic waste generated around the world last year.
That number is expected to rise to 75 million tons by 2030.
Unsurprisingly, the end of life cycle management has failed
to keep pace. Even the most optimistic estimates assume that
less than 20 percent of electronic waste is properly collected
and recycled. The harmful consequences if we continue on this
current path will have a resounding impact on the future of
this country. For example, improperly managing electronic waste
exports contributes to intellectual property theft through
microchip counterfeiting.
Further, China has recently threatened to curb exports of
critical minerals abroad. That makes the dim reality of China's
dominance in rare earth mineral extraction perfectly clear.
Taken together, these developments threaten our Nation's
military readiness and economic competitiveness.
Electronic waste also poses a challenge to public safety
and the environment. Improperly disposed lithium-ion batteries
are an increasing source of fires in landfills and garbage
trucks. The landfill industry reports at least one fire per
week in a vehicle caused by a lithium-ion battery, including
one just a few weeks ago here in Washington, DC.
Electronic waste often contains toxic materials such as
PCBs, lead, and mercury that we export to developing countries
with lax environmental standards.
Despite the many challenges I have highlighted, there are
plenty of reasons to be optimistic, and I see four of them
right here. By reducing our reliance on overseas mineral
production and enhancing our domestic recycling efforts, we can
bolster our national security and reduce potential
vulnerabilities.
Our capacity to refurbish and recover valuable materials
from discarded electronic waste has greatly improved in the
last few decades. Previously, electronic waste was just piled
into a shredder to be sold as scrap. Now the industry is
incorporating advanced technologies like robotics, optic
scanning, and machine learning. These techniques allow
discarded devices like a mobile phone to be surgically
disassembled, maintaining the purity of high grade materials
for reuse.
To illustrate just how far we have come, in 2020
institutional investors such as Morgan Stanley predicted that
no lithium would be recycled commercially in the next decade.
That was in 2020. To the contrary, this Committee will hear
testimony from the CEO of a publicly traded company whose
business is directly involved in recycling lithium. This is a
testament to our ability to solve environmental issues with
American innovation. It is time for us to realize that we are
throwing valuable economic assets in the trash under our
current system.
Our witness panel today represents the full spectrum of
interests within the electronic waste recycling industry. I
look forward to hearing your valuable insights on the state of
the innovation, best practices, and recommendations to help us
realize the full potential of recycling electronic waste.
With that, I yield back, and we will start the hearing.
Senator Capito [presiding]. We will turn to our panel of
witnesses, and again, thank you. We are grateful that you all
are here.
First, we will hear from Ajay Kochhar, who is currently the
President and CEO of Li-Cycle, a lithium-ion battery recycling
company.
Mr. Kochhar, you may begin with your statement when you are
ready. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF AJAY KOCHHAR,
PRESIDENT, CEO, AND CO-FOUNDER, LI-CYCLE
Mr. Kochhar. Ranking Member Capito, Chairman Carper,
Senators, thank you. It is a privilege to be here to have the
opportunity to share Li-Cycle's perspective on the topic of
electronic waste.
Li-Cycle, as indicated, was founded to address a missing
link in our electric future: Specifically, the lack of an
economically and environmentally sustainable lithium-ion
battery recycling solution. Li-Cycle's safe, sustainable, and
scalable Spoke and Hub Technologies return battery grade
materials to the supply chain with up to a 95 percent recycling
efficiency rate.
Our patented technology involves two steps. The first step
takes place at our spoke facilities, currently operating in
Alabama, Arizona, New York, and Canada. And at our spoke
facilities, we safely recycle lithium-ion batteries, including
full electric vehicle battery packs, through a propriety zero
combustion process that produces an intermediate product known
as black mass.
In the second step, our hub refining facilities will
process black mass to recover fundamental building blocks in
batteries again for reuse in our supply chains. We are
currently in the process of constructing our flagship hub
facility in Rochester, New York, which is expected to be the
first source of recycled battery grade lithium carbonate in
North America. The hub will also produce battery grade cobalt
sulfate and nickel sulfate.
Earlier this year, the Department of Energy announced a
conditional commit to Li-Cycle for a $375 million loan to help
finance the construction of our hub via the ATVM loan program.
We are incredibly excited to be partnering with the Federal
Government on this first of its kind facility.
This facility, once completed, will be one of the largest
sources of lithium in the U.S., whether from mining or
recycling, processing roughly 300,000 EVs worth of batteries
per year. I am particularly proud to share that during this
project, we will be creating 1,000 American jobs during
construction and approximately 270 permanent jobs once we are
operational.
Today's hearing comes at a critical juncture, given the
fact that lithium-ion batteries are now ubiquitous in our
world. These batteries create an urban mine which have highly
valuable finite materials, including lithium, nickel, and
cobalt. No single mine includes all these critical battery
materials. Our process is particularly exciting as we can
recycle these batteries in an infinite loop without degrading
the quality of the battery material.
I am also proud to share that relative to mining and
refining, our process can reduce emissions. So we can reduce
missions of CO2 by up to 67 percent. We can also
reduce water usage by up to 97 percent for every ton of battery
that we recycle.
Despite their value and importance, lithium-ion batteries
have challenges. They have challenges around environmental and
safety related topics. This includes the increasingly important
topic of e-waste. Lithium batteries will undoubtedly create a
tsunami of e-waste today and into the future.
In the near and medium term, we need to address
manufacturing scrap, which is the rejects in making batteries,
which is being magnified by the clean energy transition. To
support the growth of electrification, we need alternative,
sustainable, domestic sources of supply, and we need these
sources of supply to come online quickly.
So recycled content should undoubtedly be a part of that
solution for a number of reasons. First, responsible recycling
creates a more sustainable, long term supply of materials that
adds to a diverse energy ecosystem. Also, by doing that, we
reduce our dependence on unstable foreign supply chains and
supporting a completely localized battery industry to create a
made in America battery.
We help increase energy and economic independence in North
America, and provide inherent benefits for national security
concerns. And we mitigate risks associated with thermal events
or fires as you spoke about.
In closing, to help support a domestic sustainable closed
loop battery supply chain and help reduce e-waste, we believe
Congress should consider the following. First, clearly defined
responsibility for the end of life management of batteries, to
help ensure all batteries are in the best position to be
collected, recycled, and kept in our supply chain.
Second, create incentives to build and operate a network of
battery collection centers for consumers, auto makers,
dealerships, and more.
Third, strongly discourage landfilling of lithium-ion
batteries. As we have shown at Li-Cycle, we can recycle all
types of lithium-ion batteries today at scale.
Fourth, support and incentivize sustainable battery
recycling. It is imperative that through recycling we don't
lead to adverse environmental impacts. So it needs to be
sustainable.
Fifth, explore a requirement for minimum content for
recycled material and new batteries made in the United States.
This is actually a step which the European Union has already
taken, and something that could be considered in the United
States.
Finally, Li-Cycle is supportive of clear and consistent
guidance and regulations enabling the efficient movement of
batteries and intermediate products. This is critical to our
industry's ability to scale and address the growing amount of
e-waste in the United States and globally.
Thank you again for giving myself and Li-Cycle the
opportunity to provide our perspective on this increasingly
important topic. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kochhar follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Kochhar.
Next, we are joined by Craig Boswell, the co-founder and
President of HOBI International. He has served in the
electronics recycling industry for over 30 years.
Mr. Boswell, welcome and thank you. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF CRAIG BOSWELL, P.E., PRESIDENT
AND CO-FOUNDER, HOBI INTERNATIONAL, INCORPORATED
Mr. Boswell. Thank you, Ranking Member Capito. It is an
honor to be here today.
I come here representing my company, HOBI International. I
also represent thousands of electronics recycling companies in
the United States. And I come representing the electronics
recycling companies and the ITAD companies that are members of
the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, ISRI.
My company, HOBI International, has been in this business
for nearly 30 years. We have seen tremendous change in the
market over those 30 years. When we started, it was mainframes.
Then it moved on to desktops, and now the explosion of mobile
devices.
One constant in that market through that whole time is the
vital importance that electronics recycling plays in the
information technology economy. Companies in the U.S. employ
over 600,000 people recycling electronics, and globally, it is
considered to be more than a $40 billion market.
I would like to spend just a few minutes talking about what
we do, why it matters, and then I would like to close with some
challenges the industry is facing.
Electronics recycling companies help make the electronic
manufacturing supply chain more sustainable. We do this by
testing, refurbishing, recovering, and erasing electronics for
both consumers and companies.
We also help companies meet their ESG goals. We do this by
allowing them to reuse and recycle electronics. We also help
with the social aspect. We run donation programs that take
products off of their floors and put them into schools and
homeless shelters.
Electronics recycling companies also protect the personal
data of millions of Americans every year. We have made
tremendous investment and strides in data eradication
technology. We have also developed certification standards like
the R2 standard that allow both consumers and companies to
validate that their processor has the right type of state of
the art processes and procedures to take their equipment.
And the industry is helping to bridge the digital divide.
It is estimated that 460 million cell phones alone are put into
reuse every year. Those products represent a low cost way for
those in need or those in underdeveloped countries to become
members of the global electronics marketplace.
But we are experiencing some significant challenges. We
have already mentioned this, but one of the growing challenges
is embedded lithium-ion batteries. They are in everything from
airpods to automobiles. What that has done is, gone are the
days when these reach end of life, we just put them in a
shredder for material recovery. Now those products have to be
disassembled, largely manually, to extract the batteries before
the critical materials that are in those products can be
recovered.
Dovetailing with that is the need for design for recycling.
Our ability to recover these critical materials is largely
determined when the product design leaves the R&D phase. It is
critical that in designing these products sustainably that we
look at the end of life of the product during the design phase.
We have found that this is not only good for the bottom line of
these companies, but it helps us recover these critical
materials.
Finally, changes in international trade law are a looming
problem for the industry, especially here in the U.S. Starting
January 1st, 2025, changes in the Basel Convention will take
products that have been traditionally considered non-hazardous
and move them into a hazardous category. This will force
companies, when they try to move these materials
internationally, to meet certain pre-determined requirements.
It also requires you to be a party to the convention to trade
with other parties internationally.
What this is going to result in, the U.S. being a non-party
to the convention, is a de facto trade ban for companies here
in the U.S. This is a looming issue because the global market
for electronics is what we depend on. This will isolate
electronics recyclers in the U.S. from the remainder of the
global market.
So in summary, the electronics recycling industry is an
essential part of the global market for sustainability going
forward. We feel it is critical as you discuss policies for the
future that we be involved in those discussions.
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Boswell follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Boswell.
We will now turn to Kitty McIlroy, who serves as the
President and Director of the Maryland Recycling Network, and
is the project manager for the Northeast Maryland Waste
Disposal Authority.
Ms. McIlroy, thank you for coming.
STATEMENT OF KITTY McILROY, PROJECT MANAGER,
NORTHEAST MARYLAND WASTE DISPOSAL AUTHORITY
Ms. McIlroy. Good morning, and thank you, EPW Committee. My
name is Kitty McIlroy, and I am here to speak from my
experience as a project manager for electronics recycling
contracts at a State agency, the Northeast Maryland Waste
Disposal Authority. I am also here as President of the Maryland
Recycling Network to highlight where our network has identified
room for policy improvement.
I hope to provide some context for what exactly the public
sector has been facing over the past 10 years regarding
electronics.
Why is electronics recycling needed? Waste rates are
increasing, and many local governments in Maryland, for
example, are already shipping waste out of State due to limited
landfill capacity. Recovery of electronics is also a safety
priority, since electronics, specifically lithium-ion
rechargeable batteries, are more likely to cause facility fires
if not separately collected and safely stored, due to impacts
from compaction vehicles and equipment when moving waste.
There are benefits to recovering our reliance on foreign
supply, and mining operations, and instead, recovering these
precious metals domestically since global demand continues to
grow due to the jewelry, electronics, and auto industries.
Keeping heavy metals from electronics out of landfill
leachate is also beneficial, as there are costs to treating it
at water treatment plants. Electronics recycling also
contributes to local job growth, and when funded properly can
eliminate disposal fees to local jurisdictions.
How programs are currently managed. In Maryland and many
States, most municipal electronics recycling is managed by
local jurisdictions. Their existing infrastructure, drop off
sites, staff, historical knowledge, public education, and
procurement procedures allow them to run these programs
efficiently. Some have even implemented curbside collection for
electronics.
However, electronics recycling is generally not cost free,
especially for bulky TVs and computer monitors, which dominate
the municipal stream. Managing hazardous components, such as
lead and mercury, and providing on site capacity, storage,
infrastructure, transportation, equipment, labor, and recycling
certifications contribute to a net cost.
Local jurisdictions in Maryland generally fund these
programs through local taxes, general funds, enterprise funds,
special revenue funds, and tipping fees. Twenty-five States
plus the District of Columbia have a variety of electronics
laws, some requiring funding and/or collection to be provided
by manufacturers. The remaining States have no electronics
laws.
As it has been well documented in industry news over the
past decade, many State laws fall short. Thus, the bulk of
electronics end up at municipal drop offs, with the burden,
operational obligation, and cost left to local government. This
is especially true in Maryland. Over the past decade, many of
these programs have closed in the State, or at least partially,
due to a lack of funding, meaning that many governments are
forced to landfill electronics, notably TVs and monitors, as
the only alternative.
Beginning calendar year 2014, after the electronics
recycling market crashed, only four of eight Authority Members
were able to continue their full programs, amounting to over 5
million pounds a year of TVs and monitors landfilled, rather
than recycled.
For Authority Members, in fiscal year 2023 and 2022, it has
cost over $900,000 a year to run these programs. Currently,
only 7 of 23 counties in Maryland are able to provide permanent
recycling for all electronics at no cost upon drop off for
residents.
Proven solutions that can function as a national model. No
matter how well this market recovers, it will always be subject
to unpredictable commodity markets, recession, and inflation.
The public sector needs a sustainable source of funding,
especially for rural communities that are far away from
processors, and for jurisdictions with limited resources to
manage full time programs. Many stakeholders believe we need a
national solution.
At a minimum, I believe we need a national, Congress
chaired work group with reps from local and State government,
non-profit EPR experts, recyclers, producers, retailers, and
certification bodies to review existing best practices. The
workgroup could look at replicating what works and provide a
streamlined, cohesive set of policy recommendations.
A few laws in States like Connecticut and California could
provide this framework. They function exceptionally well in
terms of funding and administration, including manufacturer,
retailer, and recycler requirements. Some non-profits already
administer programs on behalf of State departments and are
experts in doing so, which could be explored nationally. There
are certainly many in this field who would be willing to work
on this.
Thank you for your interest in taking this first step at
improving our electronics recovery on a national level.
[Due to size constraints Ms. McIlroy's prepared statement
is not included in this hearing record but is available on this
govinfo.gov Web site. The live, online link is https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-118hhrg54562/pdf/CHRG-
118hhrg54562-add1.pdf]
Senator Carper [presiding]. Ms. McIlroy, thanks so much.
I apologize for having to be out of the room. We just
nominated a judge for the Federal District Court in Delaware,
and I needed to be there to introduce her to the Judiciary
Committee. But I am glad I got to hear the end of your
statement. I have read it, and look forward to doing the same
with the statements from our other witnesses.
I always like to make sure I pronounce people's names
right. So I would pronounce your first name ``Charles.'' Your
second name, however, is it Pellicane?
Mr. Pellicane. Correct.
Senator Carper. Very good.
Executive Vice President of Business Development and
Operations at Human-I-T. Mr. Pellicane has joined us today to
share perspectives on reuse, on refurbishment, and equitable
access.
Please proceed, and we look forward to what you have to
say, then we will ask some questions of all of you.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES PELLICANE, EXECUTIVE VICE
PRESIDENT, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS,
HUMAN-I-T
Mr. Pellicane. Thank you, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member
Capito, and distinguished members of the Committee, for this
opportunity to testify before you today.
My name is Charles Pellicane, and I am the Executive Vice
President of Business Development and Operations at Human-I-T.
Human-I-T is the country's largest digital equity organization,
with 175 employees and interns in 10 States, primarily in
California and Michigan. We are also an active member of the
National Digital Inclusion Alliance, a AAA certified vendor
with the National Association for Information Destruction, and
a member of AFTRR, the Alliance for Technology Refurbishing and
Reuse.
While promoting digital equity is our primary focus, we
sustain ourselves by providing IT Asset Disposition services,
or ITAD services, to businesses and organizations. Thus, we
solve two problems with one solution. We solve the problem of
e-waste by partnering with corporations, government agencies,
community groups, and other organizations to collect and
process unwanted technology. We use refurbished technology and
the revenues from that service to supply free and low cost
computers and monthly Internet plans for students, seniors, and
families.
Because our model promotes reuse over recycling, we not
only keep e-waste out of landfills, but we also create positive
social impact in underserved communities. We hire from within
the communities that we serve and in doing so we create unique,
future proofed job opportunities.
Our entry level employees receive hands on training in
technology repair, IT, tech support, and e-commerce, and their
roles come complete with full benefits, health insurance, paid
time off, and a 403(b) retirement savings plan.
Half of our team are in their early career, meaning they
are 30 years old or younger; 80 percent are people of color;
and more than a third are women working in a typically male
dominated field. In many ways, Human I-T is a working example
of how conscious capitalism can create equitable opportunities,
develop work force skills, and reduce environmental impact, all
at the same time. Every day, we work to empower people and
protect the planet.
Today, I am asking you to address the market's failures in
recovering aging consumer electronics, advocate for reuse and
circular economy policies, and support the Secure E-Waste
Export and Recycling Act, and implement the Computers for
Veterans and Students Act of 2022, also called the COVS Act.
Currently in the United States of America, no single e-
waste refurbisher or recycler can achieve significant market
share due to a patchwork of State and local policies and the
high costs associated with recovering, transporting, and
processing electronics products. There is little to no extended
producer responsibility, which puts the responsibility for
recycling onto individual consumers instead of manufacturers.
Nearly every city and State has a different approach. Many
do not even consider electronics within their recycling goals
and simply point consumers to hazardous waste facilities
instead of a safe and easy collection site.
At this time, it is not viable for Human I-T to scale our
public facing collection services because the value of
household consumer technology depreciates quickly and because
of other factors like planned obsolescence, restrictive design
features such as ``glues and screws,'' and the absence of a
right to repair. As a result, as much as 65 percent of consumer
electronics are not even recycled, let alone reused.
Unfortunately, lack of recycling and reuse puts the United
States in a troubling position. We are heavily reliant on
imports of many materials, such as cobalt and lithium, which
are essential for manufacturing advanced technologies. Supply
chains for many of these minerals are vulnerable to various
risks, such as foreign government actions. We can reduce our
dependence on foreign supply chains by reusing and then
recycling our electronics domestically.
E-waste contains a significant amount of valuable metals,
and also hazardous substances. Therefore, it is considered both
as an economically sound secondary resource and an
environmentally problematic one.
When we think of electronics within a circular economy it
is imperative to think of the inner loops of the circle, and
not just the outermost loop of recycling. Those inner loops
include maintaining devices and prolonging the life of
technology, reusing and redistributing working devices, and
refurbishing and remanufacturing non-working devices.
According to the EPA Environmental Benefits Calculator, it
is 25 times more beneficial environmentally to extend the life
of electronic devices than to recycle them at 3 to 5 years of
age. While at the same time, reusing first and then recycling
relieves the pressure and reliance on the primary supply of
critical minerals.
Therefore, the proper recycling and processing of
electronic waste presents an opportunity to stabilize the
critical materials market and provide proper disposal and
treatment of a hazardous waste stream. In doing so, we will
ensure sufficient resources to meet today's needs and those of
the future.
You can help non-profit refurbishers like Human-I-T by
funding public education to raise awareness on the importance
of reducing e-waste. You can also pass policies to create a
more circular economy such as Extended Producer Responsibility
and the Right to Repair. Additionally, supporting the domestic
markets by keeping resources local through implementing
legislation like the Secure E-Waste and Recycling Act and the
COVS Act.
Additional information is included in my written testimony,
and I am available to answer questions during this hearing or
afterward.
Thank you for your leadership in moving this important
conversation forward. Together we can create a circular economy
that strengthens our country and communities.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pellicane follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Mr. Pellicane, thanks so much for that
testimony.
And to everyone else, thank you, too.
My colleague, Senator Capito, has heard me quote Albert
Einstein probably too much. A lot of people may remember the
Einstein quote, what is the definition of insanity, do the same
thing over and over again and expect a different result. That
is a good quote. But my favorite is, in adversity lies
opportunity. In adversity lies opportunity.
How might that be relevant to this hearing today, Mr.
Kochhar?
Mr. Kochhar. Very relevant. Back when we started Li-Cycle
in 2016, we were told we were way too early, running a science
project, why are you recycling batteries when we are just
talking about EVs on the road. So as you said, within a problem
lies an opportunity. And to give you an idea of today's EVs,
there is probably about $4,000 worth of value in that battery
on average to be recovered. This year alone, that would be over
$3 billion of value to be recovered, just from today's sales,
this year.
Thinking forward to 2030 and beyond, you are talking about
tens of billions, hundreds of billions in our market. What is
needed is technology to bridge that gap. So we recover lithium,
which is a lot of the value in the batteries, and you have to
tackle that, and it takes a long time.
So I truly believe that, and that is the spirit of
entrepreneurship.
Senator Carper. Dr. Einstein would approve of your
testimony, I am sure. Looking down and smiling.
Mr. Boswell, same question. In adversity lies opportunity.
Is that true in this sense?
Mr. Boswell. I think it is very true. I want to thank you
for your leadership on the Recycling Caucus.
Senator Carper. Actually, we have a colleague from
Arkansas, Senator Boozman, we are all in cahoots on this
together.
Mr. Boswell. Well, it is very meaningful to the industry.
It really is very meaningful to the industry.
And as you look at our industry, one of the things that is
also changing in the electronics space is the generational
differences as products come out, it is getting smaller and
smaller. I am sure Apple wouldn't love for me to say that an
iPhone 14 isn't that much different from an iPhone 13.
What that is doing is increasing the opportunity for us to
reuse products and to use those products to bridge the digital
divide. So our industry has really shifted its focus on how we
can reuse these products and extend their life. We have been
very effective in doing that, because we can eradicate the
data. And we are even developing operating systems that can
build multi-generations back to allow these products to be
deployed both domestically and internationally to help bridge
that digital divide.
So there is quite a bit of new opportunity evolving in the
industry.
Senator Carper. Great, thank you.
Ms. McIlroy, same question. In this adversity we are
talking about, is there opportunity? In the midst of all this
adversity that we are talking about, is there opportunity? What
might that be?
Ms. McIlroy. It is a little bit different answer from the
public sector. But yes, certainly I think there is opportunity.
There are some of our member jurisdictions, or at least one
specifically, that has already started a curbside collection
program for electronics. I think if government starts looking
at that option for maximum convenience for residents to
recycle, I think it would be utilized in full.
Right now, they have a great network of physical drop off
centers. But not everybody wants to spend a Saturday dropping
off an old TV. So I think a curbside collection option would be
great.
Senator Carper. OK, thanks.
Mr. Pellicane, same question, please.
Mr. Pellicane. Thank you.
When we think about the opportunities from recycling
electronics, the panel really spoke to job creation as well,
but our organization represents that unique aspect of providing
opportunity to some historically disadvantaged communities.
Refurbishing electronics not only provides opportunity to those
disadvantaged communities, because it is really an example of
circular economy at work.
When Human-I-T takes in technology with that focus on
refurbishment, we are creating jobs for collecting,
inventorying, processing, and shipping those electronics. And
as I mentioned previously, for many of our employees, this is
their first opportunity to work in the technology space. And a
number will actually make this their career. We are very proud
to have former employees to go on to work for a number of IT
organizations, including at Google.
Once that piece of technology is refurbished and we are
able to give it to a person in need, this thing creates other
opportunities. So this takes someone who was previously lacking
in opportunity and gives them the ability to go to school, to
take vocational courses, apply for jobs, and even start a
business. So those persons now contribute to their local
economies, which leads to of course the need and use of more
technology.
So in refurbishing electronics, this not only provides an
initial person with a job, but that refurbished device then
goes on to provide a multitude of opportunities to the
recipient in addition to them being able to fully participate
in our society through things like tele-health and online
banking.
Senator Carper. All right, thanks for that response.
Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Thank you all very much.
Mr. Boswell, Ms. McIlroy actually kind of hit on this a
little bit. I represent a rural State. We can't even sustain
recycling much for paper or tin cans, things we have been doing
for years, because the economic model is not there. How would
you envision improving the accessibility of e-waste recycling
to rural America? Do you have any suggestions there?
Mr. Boswell. Yes, I think one thing that is unique about
the electronics recycling space that is somewhat different than
other recycling spaces is the barriers to entry are very low.
My company, my sister and I started our company with a few
thousand out of savings, and we used a borrowed desk in the
back of somebody else's warehouse.
So it is scalable. The vast majority of companies in the
industry are very small, mom and pop operations. I think the
key to making that work is allowing those entrepreneurs that
are in these rural areas, I live in a rural area as well,
probably not as pretty as West Virginia, but I live in a rural
area.
Senator Carper. Where do you live?
Mr. Boswell. I live in Texas, beautiful State, by the way.
I live in Tioga, Texas, a town of 500. We actually have a
small, entrepreneurial business within 5 miles of my home that
collects electronics in the local community.
What we are doing through ISRI and SERI, the R2
certification body, is we are creating training mechanisms to
allow those smaller entrepreneurial businesses to learn how to
properly eradicate data and also learn how to handle these
materials safely. Because that really represents some of the
barrier to entry, is making sure you know how to do it right.
What we don't want is people doing it wrong for their local
community. And these resources are available free of charge.
Senator Capito. So would you say there is enough of an
economic model at the very end to sustain these, obviously
sustain these businesses?
Mr. Boswell. Yes, where they develop that economic model is
reuse. In rural communities, often you have a gap with people
affording reasonable electronic products. They kind of bridge
that gap between, let's say, the school and some of the
community members to do that. It is always going to be small.
When we started, we only worked a few miles around where we
were. But it can be done at a very small scale. But it has to
be done right. Because otherwise people won't trust to use that
service.
Senator Capito. Right.
Let me ask you another question. In your testimony you
mentioned, just for clarification for me, you mentioned that it
would be helpful that when these products are being created
that the consideration for the reuse and recycling should be on
the front end rather than at the back end. Is that occurring
now or not?
Mr. Boswell. There have been some tremendous strides in
that. ISRI has a Design for Recycling Award, and many of the
winners, like Dell and Samsung, had been electronics companies.
But the market is constantly changing, so we need that dialogue
to be ongoing. The EPA has been instrumental in the past in
bringing some of that dialogue to the floor, getting recyclers
and manufacturers in the same room to feed that information
back.
So it is being done. But there is still a long way to go.
Senator Capito. Yes, that makes sense, too.
Mr. Kochhar, on your company, are you strictly dealing with
EV batteries? Are you doing phones, too, and other things?
Mr. Kochhar. We do all types of lithium batteries, phones,
mobile appliances, vacuum cleaners, et cetera. So yes.
Senator Capito. So you are constructing your first major
recycling----
Mr. Kochhar. So we are in a commercial operating phase, so
we have a two phase model, so we basically break down the
batteries, we shred them----
Senator Capito. You are doing that now.
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, and the key there is you don't have fire.
So that is what the IPs are around, is how do you prevent that.
Senator Capito. When you shred a battery, though, and try
to recover the lithium, how do you do that?
Mr. Kochhar. The first step is really physical separation.
The issue in this industry is when you go into an e-waste
process, like a traditional one, and Mr. Boswell spoke about
that, you have an embedded battery in like a phone, right? You
put it in a shredder, it is going to catch on fire.
So what we do is we take that battery which would come from
an e-waste group, and the way we shred is under a liquid, so
basically you are preventing access to oxygen, it doesn't catch
on fire. So we have four of those operating facilities today,
generating intermediate material. Then the facility you are
referring to is where we will extract the lithium from that
intermediate material.
Senator Capito. What about, Mr. Pellicane, I think it is
interesting, your perspective with the reuse portions of it,
and the statistic that you used on how much that would
eliminate a lot of waste if we just simply reused or elongated
the life of certain things. I went to the electronics show in
Las Vegas last year, and the types of products that are, you
have e-bikes, you have chips in your dishwasher, in your
refrigerator, you are talking about massive appliances.
Is the industry looking at this too? We have said a lot
about phones and e-batteries. But there is a whole host of
other products that really fall into this category.
Mr. Pellicane. Yes, absolutely. Anything with a cord, a
battery, can be recycled. You spoke to the growing kind of
electrification of things. We also know the Internet of things
as well, where you spoke to chips going into dishwashers and
your refrigerators, so that these devices can talk to each
other.
But then that of course opens up issues, right? Those
devices contain data and they also contain hazardous materials,
as we have spoken to. So the industry is looking at those
things. We as a refurbisher collect those things and then pass
those on to those certified downstream recyclers that Craig
spoke about.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Senator Ricketts, welcome back. You are on.
We have a couple of recovering Governors on this panel, and
the mother of maybe a future Governor on this panel.
Senator Ricketts. One of the things I wanted to talk about
was actually, when it comes to U.S. citizens, and we are
talking about recycling their electronics, the privacy. There
are literally hundreds of thousands of devices that get
recycled every year. And there is little accountability or
tracking with regard to where they go and what is happening to
them.
So Mr. Pellicane, I am going to ask you to maybe start on
this first, and just talk a little bit about, what do you think
is the threat, what is the risk for the 120,000 laptops,
350,000 cell phones that get recycled every year? Are U.S.
citizens' private information being put at risk with these
devices being discarded in e-waste?
Mr. Pellicane. There is definitely a risk there with that
data being recycled, if it is not being handled properly, if it
is not being handled by certified organizations. We are
certified to the National Association of Information
Destruction's AAA certification, which means that we handle
that information properly.
But if it is not being handled by the right collectors, by
the right recyclers, that does create a risk, not only with
that data being accessible, but also with the potential for
counterfeits and other issues there as well. That is why we
support the Secure E-Waste Export and Recycling Act to ensure
that those products are handled domestically.
Senator Ricketts. Also, it has been confirmed that
counterfeit parts from China are ending up in critical defense
systems here in the United States. Obviously, this is an issue
that the Defense Department has long identified as presenting a
legitimate threat to our Nation's readiness.
Much of the material used in counterfeit electronic parts
is e-waste shipped from the United States to the rest of the
world, from around the rest of the world to China. This e-waste
goes through a process known as blacktopping, where parts are
made to look brand new to the naked eye. Then these products
are resold on the marketplace.
How do counterfeit parts make it into advanced U.S. missile
systems and other military equipment undetected?
Mr. Pellicane. You definitely speak to something that is
particularly concerning and definitely was one of the impetuses
for that Secure Electronics Export and Recycling Act that has
recently been introduced. I am not an expert in that area of
how those items are ending up in our systems, and would have to
defer to those experts. But I would definitely look to provide
you with that information after the hearing.
Senator Ricketts. Do you have any ideas on what things we
could further be doing to make sure that this doesn't happen,
that we don't end up with these counterfeit parts from
Communist China?
Mr. Pellicane. Yes, that is where, again, I will point to
that Secure E-Waste Export and Recycling Act that was
introduced in the House, and obviously continuing to follow
that legislation as it moves forward.
Senator Ricketts. OK.
Do any of our other witnesses have any thoughts on what we
can do to prevent this?
Yes, please go ahead.
Mr. Boswell. Yes. So counterfeit parts are an issue. I
actually come from the defense electronics background, used to
be on the Harpoon Missile Program. So obviously we were very
sensitive to the high quality of our parts.
I will say that with the growing complexity of integrated
circuits, in my company we try to recover parts for repair and
recycling. And it is very, very difficult, re-balling a ball
grid array takes extremely difficult procedures. We have
actually found it is better to just go buy new parts than to
try to recover the parts.
I think what you will see in China is a lot of those
counterfeit parts are really commercial grade parts made at
poor facilities that are remarked because it is just too
expensive to take these parts and actually get them to new
condition. It is a significant challenge to do that.
Hopefully in the future, we will get better at recovering
ICs, because it would actually be much more sustainable. To
combat that, at least, when I was in the defense business, 100
percent testing on parts was something that we required.
Senator Ricketts. Yes, because if you are trying to
refurbish these things and it is not in a super clean room, it
is just a small particle of dust can----
Mr. Boswell. Even worse is on a ball grid array, the
connections are so close together, and you have to get those
each re-balled. And it is a very, very difficult and expensive
process.
Senator Ricketts. So I take it when you say that you are
asking for all these parts to 100 percent testing of the parts,
that is now happening for some of these parts that are going
into some of these advanced systems in the Defense Department?
Mr. Boswell. One hundred percent testing would, and again,
I am no expert, and I can provide you more information at a
later time, but 100 percent testing, at least in our situation,
and this is a few years back, would reveal the difference
between a commercial and a defense grade part.
Senator Ricketts. But is it accurate to say that if the
Defense Department was having a problem with this thing, they
were not doing 100 percent testing?
Mr. Boswell. I can't answer that question.
Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. You bet.
We have been joined by one of the two retired Navy captains
who serve on this Committee. We have a Marine colonel over
here.
Mark, we have just been talking about, Mr. Boswell has been
talking about the Harpoon Missile Program, which apparently you
were a part of. When I was in P3 aircraft mission command, we
used to carry Harpoons. So that brought a smile to my face.
All right, Mark, welcome. Thanks.
Senator Kelly. We could carry them on the A-6 Intruder that
I used to fly. Actually carried one, I never had an opportunity
to shoot it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to address our domestic source of critical minerals.
Securing them is incredibly important. It is not just to
support growing domestic industries like battery manufacturing,
but also for our national and economic security, and our
foreign adversaries, China and Russia, control the vast
majority of certain critical mineral supply chains. And we have
seen in recent months that they are willing to utilize that
control to apply pressure on us.
For example, earlier this month, China announced that it
would restrict the export of gallium and germanium products to
the United States. This is a critical mineral used in
microchips, in defense systems, and renewable energy systems.
This is just one example of a critical mineral that is
controlled by our adversaries.
So I am glad we have an opportunity to dive into this
hearing today to discuss one strategy that we have to reduce
our reliance on supply chains which need to cross an ocean. And
that is reusing critical minerals from existing devices.
In fact, about a month or so ago, a couple months ago, I
had the opportunity to visit with the Secretary of Energy,
Secretary Granholm, one of Li-Cycle's recycling spokes. This
factory, I would call it, or facility, is located in Gilbert,
Arizona.
I am glad that Mr. Kochhar is able to join us today and
share more about his work and what the company is doing in
Arizona and across the country to recapture and reuse critical
minerals in batteries and other devices. It is pretty
fascinating, what you are able to do.
And if scaled up, this process can be a win-win for our
country. These companies will create great paying manufacturing
jobs here at home, and they will reduce our dependence on
critical minerals from abroad, and help us scale up our
renewable energy economy.
Mr. Kochhar, it is good to see you again. Can you start off
by discussing how much e-waste will be disposed of in the
coming years? Do we have the capacity in the United States
right now to recapture and reuse all these materials?
Mr. Kochhar. Thanks, Senator. The short answer is no, we
don't have enough capacity to deal with these materials
domestically. In fact, I often get asked, who is your biggest
competition? Well, our biggest competition is actually shipment
to Asia. People ask about company names; it is really that.
We have a lot of groups that are brokering, trading these
materials, leaking it from the United States. I think an
objective should be that if we make it here, we should use it
here and recycle it here. I think that would be a way to keep
these critical materials in the supply chain.
Now, what is the gap? The gap is around domestic solutions,
to actually do that economically. So that is what we are doing.
But also recovering things like lithium, which is what we focus
on, a lot of the value.
So just some stats quickly. This year, probably 100,000
tons of batteries alone, lithium-ion batteries alone in the
United States need recycled. Our capacity today as a country is
probably 30,000 tons. So it is far from the mark, and it is
growing very fast every year.
Senator Kelly. It was a fascinating visit. They chop up
these batteries, and they have processes that pull out not only
the lithium, but the cobalt sulfite, the nickel sulfite,
magnesium carbonate, and other materials, and then just sell
them to manufacturers of batteries. It is really a win for
everybody.
Have companies like yours benefited from the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act?
Mr. Kochhar. Tremendously benefited. I thank Congress for
the work that has been done, and the Senate. We have seen a big
acceleration in terms of the demand for these materials, and
actual domestic activity. One of our challenges has been, how
do we get it back into the supply chain here, our downstream?
If it is not there, they are going to be shipping it overseas.
So that has been great.
As I mentioned in my remarks, we have a $375 million loan
commitment from the DOE, which we are very appreciative of. We
are already doing it, but this just helps to accelerate what we
are doing.
Senator Kelly. And that loan guarantee is helping you scale
the company?
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, that is our facility in Rochester, which
is where we will extract that lithium, nickel, cobalt, which is
the key part of what we are doing.
Senator Kelly. Any additional steps that you think Congress
should be focused on to ensure that e-waste which can be
recycled does not end up in a landfill?
Mr. Kochhar. Yes. I think what I said regarding leakage of
material to Asia is something that needs to be looked at. It is
kind of a hidden thing happening. It needs companies to step
forward and actually build, like we are doing. But there are
policy initiatives that could help around that. And there is a
range of things we are going to have to support there in terms
of being a resource.
Senator Kelly. Thank you for being here today, and thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Senator Kelly, thank you for being here
today and for adding to this hearing.
Senator Sullivan, welcome. We are glad you are here.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
witnesses here.
I want to begin with a basic question. I think it is one
that increasingly everybody is coming to an agreement on, which
is if we have critical minerals in the United States that we
should try to mine them and process them here as opposed to
relying on China. Is that generally agreement? I see everybody
nodding their heads.
Then part of that is because we have the highest standards
on the environment in the world, certainly in Alaska we do. It
is a never ending source of frustration despite that kind of
broad based policy consensus, Biden administration in so many
areas in my State at least, when they see critical minerals or
mining opportunities, they shut them down. You guys don't have
to comment on that.
I am meeting with the BLM director in my office tomorrow.
She and Secretary Haaland have just been targeting Alaska
incessantly. It is unbelievable. We have a place called the
Ambler Mining District, copper, cobalt, zinc, silver, gold,
other metals, probably the biggest, one of the biggest mining
deposits on the planet Earth. We did an EIS during the Obama
administration, into the Trump administration, got a record of
decision, 6 years, $10 million, I think it was.
Same day the President of the United States holds a
critical mineral summit at the White House on the importance of
critical minerals, the Department of Interior reverses the
record of decision and tells Alaskans to start over. So I am
going to have a little discussion with Tracy Stone-Manning in
my office tomorrow saying, this is nuts, nuts. This is just a
pro-China, anti-environment, anti-American policy. That is what
they are doing. Anti-environment, because China trashes our
environment. Alaska has the highest standards in the world.
Anyway, I just had to rant about that, because it is just
crazy, crushing jobs in my State. And it is driven by the
radical left. So Tracy Stone-Manning and I are going to have a
nice chat about that tomorrow.
But let me go back to this other issue, friend shoring not
only the production of critical minerals, but the electronic
waste recycling and reuse, especially given some of the
security concerns.
I will just open this up to all the witnesses. How do we do
that better? In the electronic waste recycling, if we can't do
it all here, and I agree with that previous comment, that we
are doing that within the collection of our strong allies, and
yes, making sure China is not in that loop, because then we
become vulnerable.
What is the best way to do that? And I am assuming
everybody on the panel of witnesses agrees with the importance
of doing that.
Mr. Kochhar, we will start with you and then just go down
the line.
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, I think there are two sides to it. I
think on the corporate side, company side, we need innovation.
We started our company 7 years ago, because we didn't see a
path for recycling lithium. And as Senator Kelly mentioned, we
also get nickel and cobalt kinds of things, too.
So it is a long journey. It is not easy.
Senator Sullivan. Are you taking those supplies all over
the world?
Mr. Kochhar. It is interesting. The batteries are
everywhere, so we basically get them locally, from where we
are. We are in New York, Alabama, Arizona, so we get them
locally from around that area. Also, the making of battery
kicks off scrap. So I think a big part of it is what do
companies need to do to step forward.
On the policy side, I think some of the steps that have
been taken are very helpful to incentivize. But there are
aspects, as I mentioned, around leakage of material that need
to be looked at. It is not just in batteries, it is in e-waste,
it is in other industries. We have to be practical about it,
you can't stifle companies at the same time, that is difficult.
But that is a big threat. We have seen it in our industry, 90
percent plus of lithium, nickel, cobalt, all heading through
China.
So we need to build it here. That is a corporate
responsibility. But there needs to be the right policy
environment to help support that.
Senator Sullivan. OK, good.
Mr. Boswell.
Mr. Boswell. I agree that there is a tremendous--well, let
me step back 1 minute for Senator Ricketts. I misspoke. It is
required to be 100 percent test, according to the 2012 NDAA.
That was one of the reasons to do that, to protect against that
problem.
But yes, this is a global industry, and there are global
supply chains involved. But we are developing a tremendous
infrastructure here in the United States to recycle and reuse
these products. Companies like mine are constantly looking for
new ways to make that path easier for consumers.
One of the things I think there is a lack of understanding
of is that this is done at a very high level and very
technically. I think the historic impression of our industry
was that they are a junk guy. And we are not junk guys.
In fact, in some ways what we do is far more technical than
the manufacturers, because we have to handle everything from an
Apple iPhone to a Cisco router. We have done that by tremendous
investment in technologies to not only erase these products,
but also to refurb them.
We do come up against issues sometimes with the
manufacturers where they don't support the reuse market. A lot
of the economics of electronics recycling is based on reuse. An
item like an iPhone is worth 15, 20, 30 times more, 100 times
more in some cases as a reusable product than it is a recycled
product for the material recovery.
So the economics of reusing it support much of what we do.
Senator Sullivan. OK, thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I just have two other witnesses, if they can
just quickly respond to that question. I am over my time.
Senator Carper. Go ahead.
Ms. McIlroy. I will go quickly.
Senator Carper. Take your time.
Ms. McIlroy. Really, there is a vast network of
underutilized collection sites in the country right now. Local
governments are collecting the majority of municipal electronic
waste. And a lot of that, if they don't have the local budget
to support it, it is going to end up in their landfill.
So if we were able to get a sustainable source of funding
to them, you would see an exponential increase in what we would
be capturing nationally. I think that is really important to
focus on.
Senator Sullivan. Good, thank you.
Mr. Pellicane.
Mr. Pellicane. I agree with my peers on continuing to drive
private and public partnership, to drive awareness of the issue
and to also create the collection and processing
infrastructure. Ultimately really deferring to the EPA's
sustainable materials management approach, use materials in the
most productive way with an emphasis on using less, reducing
toxic chemicals and environmental impacts throughout the
material life cycle, and assuring that we also have sufficient
resources to meet today's needs and those of the future.
Senator Sullivan. Great.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. You bet. Thanks so much for being here.
I understand that you and Senator Whitehouse are partnering
on some of the aspects of what we are talking about here today.
That is good.
Senator Sullivan. Yes, sir, I am continuing to do that with
him.
Senator Carper. Great. Thanks.
Mr. Kochhar, your name has been pronounced several ways
today, what do your parents call themselves?
Mr. Kochhar. You got it, sir.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you. Are your parents
still alive?
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, they are.
Senator Carper. When you are asked, does your mom ever say,
what do you really do? When she says that, what do you tell
her?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, I think they are still trying to figure
it out, from what I can tell.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. I will tell her you are doing something
good for the country.
Mr. Kochhar. We hope.
Senator Carper. And for the planet, I think.
In your testimony, you mentioned industry's need for clear
and consistent regulations that govern the movement of
batteries and recovered materials to and from battery recycling
facilities. That interstate movement of materials is
predominantly regulated by provisions in the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, affectionately known as RCRA
around here, which governs the disposal of solid and hazardous
waste.
Given the technological advancements that have occurred in
I think about a half-century since RCRA was enacted into law,
as well as the development of new industries such as lithium-
ion battery recycling, do you feel that existing Federal laws
currently provide the direction that Li-Cycle needs to operate
domestically?
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, I think with any growing industry, you
are going to have a whole host of emerging issues. I think that
is what we are experiencing in not only e-waste and the
substantive e-waste being lithium-ion batteries, and also of
course in EVs. There are some very practical things, how do you
move these materials, what are they classified as. We take in
battery input of all types, everything from small batteries in
your phone to battery manufacturing scrap. And then we make
these intermediate products that Senator Kelly was talking
about that he has seen, which contains the cathode, the anode
from the material, the copper, the aluminum.
So we make our way through. But as you can imagine, and I
just alluded to, these regulations were written for a very
different world. This innovation had not happened at the time.
So I think there are some known areas that need
clarification. We support regulatory clarification around this.
It will help the industry to scale and address this issue of e-
waste. We are happy to be a resource as you folks look at that.
Senator Carper. A follow up question, and I think I may
have answers already. What clarifications or updates to
existing statutes would help create a reliable environment for
private investments and job creation in the recycling sector? I
think you may have responded; you have already spoken to that.
Anything else you want to add?
Mr. Kochhar. Yes, I think it is really around the
classification of what is a waste, what is a product, what does
it derive from. Within waste, there are different
classifications. These are very valuable materials. I quoted
there very quickly before, $4,000 an EV battery that can be
recovered through the materials. These are valuable, critical
material resources. They are richer than any mine, and they are
available above ground.
So that is the area that needs a lot of clarification. We
support getting some added regulatory certainty around that.
Senator Carper. Good. Thank you.
Mr. Kochhar. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Ms. Kitty, I was surfing on television last
night, getting ready to go to bed. Before I went to bed, I
thought I would look for some news on television. As I went
along, I came across a rerun of a show called Gunsmoke, which
Senator Capito is too young to remember. But as recently as
last night, I heard your name. And how ironic is that, now I
hear Harpoon Missiles, going back in time.
Senator Capito, would you like to jump in? You are welcome,
and I have some more questions. Feel free.
Senator Capito. Yes, I just have one issue. I talked about
it in my opening statement, that is the potential for fire with
the lithium-ion batteries.
Ms. McIlroy, how are you all handling that in Maryland?
Then I will ask everybody else if they have some suggestions
here.
Ms. McIlroy. I think there are a couple of ways to answer
that. Right now, I think local governments are in sort of a
reactive position. I know they have taken measures to do, for
example, site checks of their electronics that are stored on
their collection sites at the end of each day, just to ensure
that something hasn't short circuited to cause that fire.
What I have heard is sometimes maybe more often at some
sites than others. Others, they will leave for the day and the
fire will start slowly, then they will see video footage of
overnight fire that has spread from electronics.
That is more of an incident when it is sitting in a stored
container. But I think the biggest issue is when these
electronics are being put in the waste stream by residents, and
they are being compacted on the tipping floor, when the trash
truck unloads.
Right now, they are mainly just having to react to that.
They are told to have fire departments basically on call. Some
sites are training their employees to use the fire
extinguishers that are on site. Some are told to wait because
of the potential chemical concerns, to wait for the actual fire
department. So I think it is kind of all over the place with
how people are reacting to this.
I had another point, but it slipped my mind. So I will end
with that.
Senator Capito. Mr. Kochhar, you said in either your
testimony or your response that you have a different method for
preventing the fire. I guess water is not what you put on a
lithium battery fire. How would you respond to that, and how do
we eliminate that risk?
Mr. Kochhar. I think there are a couple of areas.
Particularly in e-waste, it is really hard, because the
batteries are embedded in the devices. I think of old Nokia
phones, you could take the battery out. You can't do that
anymore, it is waterproof almost in some ways, usually.
So that is the first step, and companies like Mr. Boswell's
have to deal with that. Then we get the lithium-ion battery
feed.
Now, the way we shred is under immersion of a liquid. This
part of it we have patented, but it basically prevents fire.
But we know what we are getting, we are set up to handle this
material. But in other cases, they are not. That is where the
issue arises, if is you don't know, then you have the potential
for fire.
Senator Capito. Mr. Boswell, do you have a response to the
fire potential?
Mr. Boswell. Yes, I think the point he makes is valid.
Companies in this industry that have had to deal with this
problem, we are making a lot of strides in doing this safely,
investing in training. ISRI provides training on how to handle
batteries safely. Our companies themselves, we make a focus on
how our employees should handle them safely.
The biggest issue is when they get into a stream other than
to an e-waste processor. I think is some of the education funds
that were out there, and infrastructure for recycling, it would
be well served to help educate the public on the difference
between the electronics recycling stream and the municipal
recycling stream.
Senator Capito. Right.
Mr. Pellicane, do you have a comment?
Mr. Pellicane. Yes, to just echo the sentiments of my
colleague, Craig. As a non-profit refurbisher, we follow all
local ordinances as well as industry best practices. But as
Craig speaks to the issues, of course, when our employees that
are trained, or employees like HOBI's organization that are
trained are handling those. So really investing in that public
awareness that Craig spoke to.
Also the infrastructure that Kitty spoke to, to be able to
handle those things within municipalities.
Senator Capito. I would like to thank all of you. I am
going to admit, when we had the topic of our hearing, I
thought, is this going to be very interesting? And you know, it
is very interesting. Because it really impacts everybody at
every level, here in government, obviously, but in our garages
and our closets and other places.
It is only going to get worse. I think the economic model
has got to be there. I like the idea of a lot more reuse rather
than just removing it and disposing of it. Because that is
never going to get any better, either. And it is just going to
accumulate.
Any way we can be supportive, I will take your suggestions.
Mr. Kochhar, you lined out some really interesting ones,
and Mr. Boswell got into the trade issue, which sounds like an
enormous issue and could be quite painful to fix as well.
I want to thank you all very much. I appreciate it. Thanks
for coming in.
Senator Carper. I think this is a wonderful hearing. We
have a lot going on in the Senate, the committees and so forth.
So members are pulled in a lot of different directions today. I
love this hearing. I am delighted that you are all here
participating.
Senator Capito and I work on a bunch of stuff together. And
this is going to be a great one. So thank you.
If I could, a question for Ms. McIlroy, please. It deals
with municipal programs, which you talked a little bit about
already. You mentioned in your testimony that consumers
predominantly dispose of electronics at municipal drop off
sites. My question is, what is the benefit of having municipal
programs collect electronics for recycling, and how do
municipal programs compare to manufacturers' take back
programs?
Ms. McIlroy. The benefits of it are that local government
is already doing the majority of this collection and
contracting for recyclers. So they already have the expertise,
it is pretty streamlined at this point. It is just whether or
not they have the funding to do it.
Another benefit is because the general public is already, I
would say, well trained. They know to look up their
jurisdiction's program if they have an end of life electronic
that they need to get rid of. Trying to retrain the public to
look on a manufacturer's website to find the specific
information for that one device that they need to get rid of, I
don't think that is realistic. That again would put a burden on
local government employees, because they would still have to be
training the public on that.
Either way, they would still have to be heavily involved,
and it would take a lot of their time to still continue the
management of electronics, whether or not it is actually ending
up at their site. There would still be a big component that
they would have to do public education wise.
From my perspective, I would feel uncomfortable not having
the ability to do due diligence when I am contracting, doing a
procurement for a recycler. If that is left to just
manufacturers and the public isn't really involved in the
procurement process, reviewing the financials, the
certifications, going on site to these recyclers and seeing it
in person and having the ability to audit and look at their
downstream recycler's information, I don't think that would be
a good trend to move toward. Because I don't know how much
control public entities would have at that point if the
programs are just manufacturer run.
Senator Carper. Should we require manufacturers to pay into
municipal collection programs?
Ms. McIlroy. My personal opinion is yes. Within the
Maryland Recycling Network, we are looking at, with some local
elected officials, updating the current Maryland law to
potentially do some sort of hybrid manufacturer funded model
with potentially a consumer fee. Those are existing laws in
other States that run on both of those models. We are looking
at maybe updating what is in Maryland to see if we could do a
blend of that, to basically take the financial pressure off of
local government and put that burden on manufacturers and
consumers.
Senator Carper. I am going to go back to the first question
I asked, Ms. McIlroy. I am going to repeat it and ask other
witnesses if they would like to make a comment as well.
What is the benefit of having municipal programs collect
electronics for recycling? And the second half is, how do
municipal programs compare to manufacturers' take back
programs? Do you have any thoughts on that? If you do, fine, if
you don't, that's OK.
Mr. Boswell. I can say that creating avenues for consumers
to do this conveniently is very important. You can look at the
parallels, for instance, for the rechargeable batteries.
Rechargeable batteries have multiple collection points, every
Home Depot store, every Lowe's store is a place you can bring
back a rechargeable battery, as well as a lot of municipal
recycling alternatives.
So those multiple pronged approaches give consumers the
most options possible. I think the issue you run into when you
look at manufacturer funding is, we have run into situations,
especially in electronics, there is probably more EPR in
electronics than anything else in this country. We have seen
some disastrous effects of that as there was no producer
responsibility organizations that involved recyclers, that
looked at what is a reasonable fee, what should this reasonably
cost, rather than driving to the lowest cost alternative, which
ended up creating CRT stockpiles in almost every State. Because
the lowest cost alternative was the guy who said, I will take
them, I will take whatever you pay me per pound, I will stick
them in a warehouse, and I will figure it out later. That
created a bigger problem than we had in the first place.
Senator Carper. OK.
Senator Capito, I have a couple more questions, but why
don't you go ahead?
Senator Capito. I have completed my questions, thank you.
Senator Carper. All right, thanks.
I have a question for Mr. Boswell on the Basel Convention.
I know you are aware that the United States is I think the only
developed country not a party to the Basel Convention, a
national agreement that governs the transportation of hazardous
waste between nations.
How has the United States' failure to ratify the Basel
Convention impacted the electronics recycling industry over the
last 20 or 30 years? Also, how will the United States be
affected by the new Swiss-Ghana amendment to the Basel
Convention, which establishes new definitions for hazardous and
non-hazardous electronic waste?
Mr. Boswell. This is the looming problem, the guillotine
that is over the industry's head right now. January 1st, 2025,
when Swiss-Ghana comes into effect, us being a non-party to the
convention, we will essentially have only one trade partner
outside of the U.S., and that will be Canada, because we do
have a bilateral in place with Canada right now.
Hopefully we will get an agreement in place with OECD
before that date. But this is a global market. The example I
always like to use is, we do a lot of phones. Apple phones are
dominant in the U.S., so everybody wants an Apple phone here.
Android phones are much more popular in the rest of the world.
I can get 22 percent more for a Google Pixel in the Middle East
and Europe than I can in the U.S.
Come 2025, if that Google Pixel maybe has a cracked screen
or something else that they would lump it in now, under Basel,
if you drop your phone, it is now a hazardous material, because
you cracked the screen. We would not be able to participate in
those markets.
So I think in the short term, because it is coming so
quickly, we would support bilaterals with key partners, trade
partners and the OECD change would make a big change. But in
the long term, yes, it looms as a problem for the industry.
Senator Carper. I think my last question will be a question
for the entire panel, for all four of you. And again, I think I
speak for Senator Capito and my other colleagues as well on our
Committee. We have really enjoyed this conversation, and
welcomed this conversation about the good work that all of you
are doing to address what is a really critical issue of
electronic waste. But a promising issue as well.
I am encouraged to hear from the four of you who are as
committed to this issue, frankly, as we are. We appreciate your
work to make sure that we leave behind a planet that is not
just as good as, but maybe even better than the one we
inherited from our parents and grandparents.
I want to give each of you the opportunity to share with us
maybe two or three key actions that you think Congress should
consider to improve electronics circularity, shore up our
domestic supply of critical minerals, and address the link
between reuse and providing access to digital products that
fuel modern life.
Let me say that again. I want to ask each of you to share
with us two or three key actions that Congress should consider
to improve electronics circularity, shore up our domestic
supply of critical minerals, and address the link between reuse
and providing access to digital products that fuel modern life.
Mr. Pellicane, would you like to go first?
Mr. Pellicane. Thank you.
As I mentioned in my testimony and as Senator Capito spoke
to as well, there is a lack of awareness, there is poor
collection infrastructure, and there is national security
concerns all tied into this issue of e-waste. So really, those
three areas are the key actions we can take to address it. It
is funding public education to raise awareness on the
importance of reducing e-waste.
As we have spoken to here today, nearly everyone has that
old drawer or box on the shelf in the garage with a stack of
broken laptops or a bunch of old cell phones. That is an
indicator of a broken system. So informing people of the
methodology to do that, and ensuring that that is out there is
important.
Additionally, recently the Broadband Equity Access and
Deployment and Digital Equity Act were passed. And that
implementation of broadband infrastructure is going to lead to
a huge increase in demand for free and affordable devices.
There has never been a more critical time to open up new
pipelines of devices for low income people to obtain and
benefit from.
We can do that by raising awareness and increasing our
infrastructure around collecting and reusing those devices. We
can't think that just because we put that broadband
infrastructure out there that people will access it. We need to
give them the capability to do that with devices, Internet
assistance, technical support, and digital literacy.
Additionally, Congress can pass policies, as we spoke
about, to create a more circular economy, such as extended
producer responsibility and the right to repair, really
recognizing that the establishment of effective e-waste
collection mechanisms includes the collection and processing of
e-waste is critical, and that that infrastructure is different
than your typical recycling infrastructure.
As we spoke about here today, making devices more easily
refurbishable in general, and ensuring that any right to repair
legislation includes non-profit organizations as well.
Finally, we spoke today about supporting domestic markets
by keeping resources local through implementing legislation
like the Secure E-Waste Exports and Recycling Act, and also the
COVS Act. Really, there is that national security importance
that we need to recognize, and that there is an ability to
create jobs through the proper collection of those items while
at the same time reducing our dependence on imported minerals.
Senator Carper. That is a pretty good to do list. One of
the things I look for is repetition. Sometimes people say,
well, I don't want to repeat something someone has already
said. Repetition is good, especially in a setting like this. So
feel free to repeat if you would like.
Ms. McIlroy.
Ms. McIlroy. I am going to second the exploring the EPR
policies. Specifically, I really do think that we could be
successful with a Senate or Congress led work group to look at
our high performing State laws in this country. I would say
there aren't that many of them, but there are some that stand
out.
Senator Carper. Like find out what works, do more of that?
Learn from mistakes, laboratories of democracy.
Ms. McIlroy. Yes. And I think we want to make sure, as was
mentioned earlier, we do not want to leave recyclers out of the
conversation. I know that there are some States on the East
Coast where I have talked to recyclers that were struggling
when their programs were supposed to be funded by State laws,
but didn't end up happening in reality, and they were left
holding the bag, or local government was.
So I think there are some really good models out there, and
I think as long as everybody is involved, we could probably
come up with a good solution.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Mr. Boswell.
Mr. Boswell. I certainly want to echo education. I think
there is a lot of room here, and it needs to go beyond just
hey, these products are recyclable. I think one of the
fallacies, we have mentioned it countless times here, is that
people believe their data is safer in their drawer than with my
company. I can tell you, in your drawer, somebody would say,
wow, that is $75 on eBay, your 14 year old takes it, sells it
on eBay, and your data is gone.
You send it to us, and within days, maybe even hours, that
data is really gone. Because when we erase it, it is gone from
everywhere. It is non-recoverable.
I think a second thing, it is important that we understand
that these products, and we say e-waste, but this is not waste.
These are products that can be reused. These are valuable,
critical materials that we can recover from the products. So we
sometimes use that waste moniker and we put a burden on the
industry around that moniker that makes it more cumbersome and
costly for us to move these materials.
Finally, the trade is going to be a huge issue. Our
solutions for companies here in the U.S. to still participate
in the global market are very, very important for the industry.
Senator Carper. Thank you for that.
Mr. Kochhar. In the spirit of keeping it to repetition, I
will repeat the top three from my recommendations. First, I
think there needs to be an assessment of this leakage issue
that I talked about around, not only batteries but also e-
waste, in the spirit of making it here, using it here and
recycling it here, that is No. 1.
No. 2 is around regulatory clarity on the movement of
batteries, materials, the intermediate products. Again, it is a
new industry. So that will take some public-private
conversation to figure that out.
The third would be considering steps that other
jurisdictions have taken, such as minimum recycled content in
new batteries. It needs to be adjudicated well that it is not
overly ambitious, but you can get to a path where it creates an
incentive to get there.
Thank you very much.
Senator Carper. Before we close out, Senator Capito, any
last thoughts?
Senator Capito. No, I just want to express again my
gratitude for you all for being here today, to continue our
work. Thank you.
Senator Carper. In closing, let me thank each of you for
joining us today, for appearing and for your testimony. I also
want to thank you for what you do with your lives. We want to
thank you for what you do with your lives. There are some
people out in the audience sitting behind you that I would like
to thank as well for what they are doing in this important
effort.
I believe we have had an important and I think an inspiring
discussion today about the impacts of electronic waste and the
role that recycling is playing and can play in shoring up our
domestic supply of critical materials and minerals.
Before we adjourn, a little bit of housekeeping. Senators
will be allowed to submit questions for the record through the
close of business on Wednesday, August 9th. We will compile
those questions and send them to each of you and ask you to
reply by Wednesday, August 23rd.
Additionally, the hearing record will remain open until
August 23rd for anyone who wants to submit materials pertinent
to this hearing topic.
I don't know if Dr. Einstein is tuned in today and is
watching this hearing, but if he is, he must be thinking, in
adversity lies opportunity. He was right then, and he is right
today. There is lots of adversity amidst plenty of opportunity
here. It is up to all of us to seize the day. Carpe diem.
Thank you so much. With that, we are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:37 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]