Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for continuing with us on TD Cowen Sustainability Week. I'm David Deckelbaum, follower of next generation materials research coverage. I'm pleased to be joined by Albemarle, including Meredith Bandy and Aron De Castillo. Meredith is the VP of IR and sustainability, and Aaron is the manager in investor relations. Thank you both for coming and pitching in for Scott, who's, you know, had some other things to attend to today. Appreciate your time and looking forward to the conversation.
Yeah, thanks so much for having us, David. Happy to jump into Q&A since we're running a little bit behind.
Yeah. Maybe, you know, ESG has been a primary focus of Albemarle and something you're intimately involved with and familiar with. Meredith, can you give us some of the high points that you've been emphasizing and some of the goals that you've been shooting towards, especially in the last year, and then maybe we can dig into some of the asset level performance metrics?
Yeah, that'd be great. Thanks very much for the question. One of the reasons why we were so excited to be here today is, of course, because yesterday we launched our 2022 sustainability report. Lots of great new information in that report. For example, we give you all of the progress on our sustainability targets. We're tracking on track for targets including greenhouse gas, Scope 1 and 2, fresh water intensity, and also DEI. Then we're also announcing some new targets. One is our initial Scope 3 targets, just around collecting baseline data for our raw materials. We've also announced a new target for air quality around SOx emissions. Lastly, we have our next set of targets for DEI.
We're really pleased with the progress we've made so far, and we're excited about these new, more stringent targets that we're announcing as well. Another thing that might be really of interest to a lot of our investors is this year we'll have our first TCFD, our Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures. That's something that we've been talking to investors about a lot, and I know people will be excited to hear more about that in the report as well.
I appreciate that. You know, I know a lot of us think about the lithium industry now and Albemarle's involvement there as a market leader, but what are some of the other products that you all have highlighted as having a positive impact on the environment?
Yeah. Well, a lot of people do think of us really as a lithium company. Obviously, energy storage is the largest of our three businesses, and lithium is absolutely critical for the clean energy, clean transportation, and the electric vehicle revolution. We have the similar stories around our specialties products. For example, for our bromine specialties, you know, electric vehicles have about three times more brominated flame retardants in them than an ICE. A lot of those specialties products are leveraged to those same electrification and digitalization key trends. We also have some really exciting new products in the specialties division. For example, we announced MercLok this year. MercLok is a product. It's a bromine-based technology that's able to remediate soil contaminants in the soil around mercury.
We think that's actually a platform product, where you can remediate not just soil, but potentially other types in their environments, like water and perhaps other types of contaminants beyond mercury. Some really exciting sustainable products in the specialties division as well.
Thanks for highlighting those. Meredith, I know what's been top of mind for a lot of investors is some of the changes that we've seen in Chile, around Codelco, around discussion around nationalization. I know that there's been some confirmation that contracts that you all have in place through 2043, I believe, are anticipated to be honored in the spirit that they exist now. Can we talk about just how their new lithium strategy is, as you are one of two incumbent producers in the country, how does it impact Albemarle?
Yeah, well, they've been talking for a while about a lithium strategy, and so this was more details that the government provided on that. They have made it clear that they would fully respect all of the existing commissions and contracts. We, of course, have a commission that's in place through 2043, so our existing operations are not changed under the new strategy. We continue to operate as normal. Chile is a very advanced country. They have a long history of operating under the rule of law. They're actually an OECD country as well. We have a lot of, you know, conviction around our ability to continue to operate there. Albemarle and our predecessor companies have been in Chile, operating very successfully, for more than 40 years.
Now, one of the things I think that came up, at least with Chilean conversations, was the implementation of direct lithium extraction or DLE with future growth projects. To my knowledge, Albemarle actually had been, I guess, investing in the technology and testing some applications as far back as 2018, perhaps. Can you talk a little bit about Albemarle's experience with DLE in the Atacama? Is this something that we should be thinking about as an application, either on the existing contracts or in future contracts beyond 2043 for Albemarle and Chile?
Yeah. First of all, you know, the most important thing for us is to operate responsibly, everywhere we operate, and that's certainly how we want to operate in Chile as well. Our existing operations in Chile don't use DLE. They use passive solar evaporation, which has a very low global warming potential or carbon footprint. It uses passive solar energy. It does not consume any fresh water in the extraction process, and it also doesn't add any chemicals into the naturally occurring brine. It's a very sustainable production method as we have it today. You're absolutely right. We do look at DLE technologies in a lot of our different assets. For example, we actually announced, I think, back in 2011, a DLE project in Arkansas.
We've been looking at a lot of different DLE technologies for a very long time, and we do think those do have applications in various places around the world. The benefits of DLE is that it has a very high yield. The challenges around DLE is they tend to require a lot of fresh water, which, of course, is an issue in the Salar de Atacama. They require more energy. You're basically creating a synthetic brine and then having to re-inject the existing brine, which is technically complicated, although we do do it, for example, in Magnolia.
Then also, there's a challenge in terms of just the ability to scale that resource, either from the pilot, the lab to the pilot to the industrial scale, and also to apply it by DLE technology to different brines. Each brine is different, so it's not sort of a one-size-fits-all process. We have looked at a lot of different DLE technologies. We do have technologies that we think could be suitable in some instances, that could potentially include future production in the Salar de Atacama, but not on our current operations.
Appreciate that. Maybe you can switch a little bit in terms of geographies, to talk about Australia. You know, you all successfully renegotiated the MARBL JV, and announced intentions to expand upon Kemerton. Obviously existing with Talison already, you have, you know, Greenbushes growing. Can we kind of revisit the growth profiles that you see on the upstream side, and sort of reconcile Wodgina and Greenbushes that you're expanding currently, and relate that to the build-out at Kemerton and ultimately some of the conversion capacity that you're adding in China?
Yeah. Aron, you wanna talk to that?
Sure. One of our competitive advantages is our vertical integration and our access to some of the world's lowest cost and highest grade resources. Currently, we are resource long, as a lot of the focus is on building out conversion. We mechanically completed Kemerton one and two last year and just announced the FID on Kemerton three and four to show our commitment to Western Australia as well as the connection to those high-quality resources there. With Greenbushes, the realignment of our MARBL JV has really streamlined the access from that resource to Kemerton. Our Greenbushes production has grown with the completion of the tailings retreatment project in 2022, and CGP3's construction is underway, with that expected to be in the next few years of completion.
Greenbushes is intended to feed Kemerton. For Wodgina, Train Three is running, but the expectation is that Train Three's feed would be completed at the end of the year. As Wodgina is ramping, the expectation is that would feed some of our JV-owned assets in China, including Meishan, which will be completed next year, and Qinzhou, which was completed in 2022.
Yeah, Greenbushes will be large enough that it can not only feed Kemerton but also help to feed some of our other Chinese assets as well.
Well, I guess if you think about total upstream capacity in Australia relative to the conversion and conversion capacity in China, will those be effectively matched between those two regions?
For Albemarle, it will be.
Yes.
Yes.
I guess maybe you can talk a little bit about, you know, near term, there's some expansion happening, obviously, in China and Australia. You know, you've had your, I guess, Salar enhancement project in Chile, and then La Negra expansion that was sort of towards the end of last year. You've announced, I think, embarking on, the Mega-Flex facility, sort of towards, you know, the 2027 timeframe in terms of first commissioning there. Can we talk about Albemarle's future under the IRA and the potential qualifications there and how the company is positioning to benefit strategically from the Inflation Reduction Act?
Yeah. Well, we certainly feel like we're really well positioned to benefit from the IRA because we're one of the few producers that already has multiple assets in the United States. We already produce carbonate at the Salar, but at Silver Peak in Nevada. We're also then further processing that carbonate into hydroxide at Kings Mountain. We also operate a relatively large bromine facility at Magnolia, Arkansas, which could also potentially produce lithium. We have an existing footprint, and we also have opportunities within our portfolio to produce additional resources right here in North Carolina, in Kings Mountain, North Carolina, where we have a brownfield mine. Those are really exciting opportunities for us.
Beyond that, we also have a really large presence, as you know, in Chile and Australia, which are free trade agreement countries. That also helps us to meet the needs for IRA-compliant materials. As part of that really aligns well with a lot of our strategy to continue to grow, to be diversified globally, and to meet the need for localized supply in the U.S. and in other parts of the world as well.
I guess in conjunction with that, you all recently announced, a new offtake agreement with Ford. Can you kind of go over some of the highlights there and then maybe differences versus some of the prior offtake agreements that you signed with some of the other OEMs or other customers, perhaps? Do you want to take that one?
Something Ford highlighted during their capital markets day was they do have a lot of deals with not yet producing lithium companies, but it was really important to them to have a partnership with an established lithium producer because one of the highlights is the scale. That we're really able to deliver based on our existing asset base, as well as the expansions that we have planned in the U.S. and free trade agreement countries. A big part of that was having that access to what would be IRA compliant material to support those incentives. The size of it, the 100,000 kilotons of LCE over the 5 years was a large highlight.
In our more strategic partnerships across the supply chain, particularly with OEMs, there's a big opportunity to collaborate on things like recycling and technology. Part of what was announced is our partnership on a closed loop solution, because we see that as essential, for instance, for accessing end-of-life batteries and partnering to create a closed loop solution.
Just, can you give a little bit more details around, like, building out a closed loop solution? Would that be a solution that Albemarle collaborates on, like, at Ford's battery facilities, or would this be something that is happening, like, at the Albemarle, like, conversion facility level?
We haven't yet provided details on that partnership. Our Richburg facility does, for example, have the flexibility to take recycled feedstock, as a resource. Our expertise fits really well in the extraction of lithium from black mass, for instance. We'll provide more details as we have those. Really, one of the intents is on both the upstream and downstream of the recycling process.
Yeah.
We, you know, we wouldn't speak specifically to Ford's process, cause obviously they'll have their own, strategies that may be different from other players. One of the things that we've seen more generally in terms of recycling is, just as Aaron mentioned, for us, it becomes another material, another resource, basically. Richburg, potentially at the European Union facility, we'd be looking at having at least one train that would take recycled feedstock rather than virgin material. And we're already working today at our Kings Mountain technology facility in terms of looking at different types of black mass and what's the easiest and most efficient and most sort of highest return way to extract the lithium from that black mass in the conversion process.
That's where we really see our role and our expertise in the recycling, sort of ecosystem, if you will, rather than going out and, you know, necessarily collecting batteries and that sort of thing.
Yeah. I guess, you know, without going into the specifics of the deal with Liontown Resources, you know, I know in the past, you know, Scott, on some public calls, has talked about looking at all assets. I think you all even highlighted in your strategy day back in January, sort of the frontier of resource quality and what future projects look like. I guess at a high level, you know, what sort of assets fit into the Albemarle portfolio or strategically make the most sense at this point? Or is there really just kind of the right price, right asset, right time, coincident? Well, I think it's probably all of those things.
When we think about our M&A strategy, you know, really it's about how are we executing our long-term growth strategy and being disciplined in our capital allocation. Typically, what we'll see is three main areas where we could potentially look at external or inorganic opportunities to accelerate our growth strategy. One is on the resource side. When we look at our aspirations to more than, or up to triple our conversion capacity, we will want to continue to be vertically integrated, and that means we need to continue also to build our resource capacity in order to do that. That's one piece. Another piece is around technology.
Aaron talked a little bit about some of the technology we're looking at for recycling, but there's lots of different technology, whether that's process technology or advanced energy materials, where you might look at a partner to bring some technology to accelerate growth. Those are the primary areas that we're looking at, and we just want to be really disciplined about the way we continue to progress our inorganic or organic opportunities. That makes sense. Maybe revisiting like the prior comment on just as you think about balancing conversion capacity versus resource capacity for Albemarle, especially, I guess, through 2030, which you all have provided some forecasts around, do you foresee periods of time where there are distinct mismatches between conversion capacity that you all have invested in and resource capacity that you have available to feed?
Particularly with some of the perhaps newer markets like the U.S. and Europe, that you endeavor to get involved in over time.
Yeah. Well, obviously, you're not gonna be able to perfectly match it, so the idea would always be that you're bringing on resources ahead of the conversion rather than vice versa. Certainly, that's what we're seeing as through today, and Aaron talked a little bit about some of the Wodgina and Greenbushes expansions that are already underway. Basically what that means is, and you can see it in our growth outlook as well, is that ideally, we would have excess resources, and then you'd have those tolling opportunities that would be sort of the bridge to the new technology, new conversion assets. That would be the primary way that we would look to do that.
That means that if you want to triple your conversion capacity, you need to be looking at resources now, 'cause resources tend to be the long lead time items on that. That's certainly what we're doing at places like Kings Mountain, for example. That's probably where you would see some potential mismatches. Another thing that we've sometimes talked about is, you know, would you potentially feed, like, a Richburg, South Carolina plant, the US Mega-Flex, with Australian spodumene, while you're waiting for Kings Mountain to also start up? Just because kind of like you're doing with Kemerton now, where you have a Greenbushes ore that you already know really well and have used for a long time, and using that on a new plant, while you're also ramping up newer resources as well.
There might be a lot of options for us because of the diversity of our portfolio, to match different resources with different conversion assets.
Yep. I mean, would the advantage of, or, and flexibility of using perhaps, you know, Wodgina and Greenbushes spodumene to be converted in Richburg, is that more just flexibility to test the assets as they're coming online, or would there be, like, a strategic reason of processing that in the U.S. versus doing it at Kemerton? Because I suppose, are the costs relatively similar?
It would really be around just having a resource that you already know very well and using that to start a new facility. That would be the primary thinking around that.
More of a de-risking attraction, I guess.
Yeah.
Okay.
Flexibility. Keeps a lot of flexibility in your supply chain.
I guess, like, maybe just to wrap up this point is that as you're expanding resource ahead of conversion, when we think about Albemarle making long-term investments, and I guess costly investments as well on the conversion side, should we think of those as more iterative and flexible based on the timing of resource assets coming online, so that year-to-year, the conversion facility CapEx is gonna be more fungible around what sort of resource we have available in the given sort of discrete period that we're looking out at?
Yeah, I think that's a fair way of looking at it. I mean, one thing that we've heard Eric talk about a lot is eventually you just get to where you have a very large base of production, and you're just adding, quote, unquote, "a plant a year." When we say a plant, usually we're talking about a train or 2 a year. You don't have these big step ups. You're just constantly sort of iterating another train at a brownfield expansion site. That's ideally the place you get to as you continue to grow your portfolio.
Maybe just in the last few minutes that we have here, I know you all had reported earnings now, I guess about a month ago. You had revised kind of your outlook, but also I think in the context of spot pricing in China falling so precipitously, there wasn't necessarily a huge revision to guidance. And I think the market's having a difficult time digesting, like, what these prices on the screen mean, how they relate back to Albemarle's realizations. How do you, how do you sort of think about the pricing volatility in the lithium market going forward, and how you think about that in the context of structuring contracts?
I think a lot of folks, we saw the progression in battery-grade contracts moving predominantly to market-based pricing, and yet we see market-based pricing obviously looking weak, and that weakness doesn't necessarily show up in Albemarle's bottom line. Maybe you could thread the needle a little bit there for us, but also maybe share some views on, you know, if you really just see this volatility increasing as the market gets larger and the buying continues to become more and more seasonal.
I don't know. Erin, maybe we'll split that up, and if you wanna talk a little bit about some of the pricing fluctuations we've seen, and then I can talk a little bit about the contracting philosophy.
Sure. One piece in having 90% of our contracts being index referenced and variable price is that there are a lot more indices now that are representative of the region of the customer and the product. Many of these, the majority of our contracts are really towards Asia CIF prices, for instance, that are more indicative of contract traded volumes versus the spot. Those have remained relatively robust as what we saw in the beginning of the year was largely a function of China carbonate destocking specifically.
It was kind of the perfect storm of seasonal factors of an earlier Lunar New Year, the ending of some of the China EV subsidies, the reopening of the Chinese economy that correlated with some of the shutdowns in industrial production and demand softness that led to really rapidly price kind of falling in the first quarter of the year. That was partially from those demand factors in part, but mostly from destocking. Since then, we saw the price had increased over the last several weeks, especially as EV and battery production have continued to grow in that region, and customers get to really low levels of inventory and begin to restock.
Yeah.
That's is largely what we saw happening throughout the movements in the Chinese spot price, specifically.
Yeah. Then in terms of our own contracting, I mean, you're right, it is far more market-based than it has been in the past. However, still, most of our contracts are really under long-term market index reference pricing, right? Which is just what Erin was saying, that it's not just the Chinese spot price, that the Chinese spot price does, in fact, the relatively small amount of production that we actually sell on spot, but most of the market index reference contracts are tied to indices which are, A, less volatile than the spot price, and B, they're actually at a 3-month lag, so you have some smoothing of that pricing. I think that's why you have not yet seen as big of a move as you would potentially see.
On top of that, as Erin mentioned, you're starting to see stabilization in that spot price, which has been nice to see over the last couple of weeks as well.
Absolutely. Well, I know that, you know, we're approximately at time here, so I do want to thank you all for pitching in today and joining us during our sustainability week, and congratulations on the sustainability report that came out, and looking forward to tuning in at the end of the month for your own sustainability day. Thank you both for joining again.
Thanks. Appreciate it, David. Take care.
Thank you.