William Oplinger: Yes. So, ELYSIS, we continue to make progress on ELYSIS. We will have a commercial size test cell running in 2024 at the Rio Tinto’s Alma smelter that’s a 450 kA cell. So from that cell, we’ll be able to get good reading on how well it operates and be able to get a good feel for how well it operates at a commercial side. So, our view is that we won’t be implementing anything till post 2030 that gives time for the technology to be completely developed and vetted out so that when we get to a point of large capital expenditures for ELYSIS pipelines, we’ll have a good sense that the technology is completely solid.
Carlos De Alba: And from what you see today, Bill, would you implement the ELYSIS potlines in the current smelter, or do you think it should be more in a greenfield?
William Oplinger: It’s really early, Carlos, and what some of the restrictions that we will be placing on it is that it only makes sense for us to implement ELYSIS where we have green sustainable power, renewable power that’s inexpensive. So, we’ll be looking around the world both for brownfields and greenfields in the 2030s timeframe to implement ELYSIS, but it will have to be on renewable low-cost sustainable power.
Carlos De Alba: All right. Great. Thank you very much. Get better soon.
William Oplinger: Thanks.
Operator: The next question is from Katja Jancic with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead.
Katja Jancic: Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. First, Bill, can you provide an update on the permitting process for the new bauxite mine areas in Western Australia?
William Oplinger: Yes. So, we’re focused on — continue to be focused on the EPA assessment process, but we’re moving forward on the Part 4 process for Myara North and Holyoake. There are a series of steps that are outlined on our website. So, it actually makes it much easier for you to follow along and see how you can hold us accountable for moving forward. We will have — we expect an EPA public comment period on the environmental review document that could be as early as the second quarter of 2024, maybe that goes into the third quarter. We’ll prepare responses to the submissions for that in the third quarter of 2024. The EPA will publish a report on their assessment, we say, in the first quarter of 2025. That’s all leading toward a ministerial decision at the end of 2025, the fourth quarter of 2025, so that we can implement the mine move so that we can get there no earlier than 2027.
So those are the various steps, and we are continuing to make progress on those steps.
Katja Jancic: Okay. And then maybe on the 45X credits, do you think alumina and other input costs are eventually going to be included in the calculation? And if so, what would the incremental benefit for you potentially be?
Molly Beerman: Katja, if alumina and all of our raw materials are included, we should see about $30 million to $40 million benefit from the direct material inclusion. We have made our case to the government and now we are waiting a word.
Katja Jancic: Is there any timeline on when the decision could be made?
Molly Beerman: Unfortunately, no.
Katja Jancic: Okay. Thank you so much.
Operator: The next question is from Michael Dudas with Vertical Research. Please go ahead.
Michael Dudas: Yes. Good evening, Bill, Molly and Jim.
William Oplinger: Hey, Mike.
Molly Beerman: Hi, Mike.
Michael Dudas: Yeah. So, I guess encouraging news on the sanctions out of UK and US. And with the Russian aluminum situation, any read or thought about the EU there on following through? And maybe on the dynamics of the marketplace, I mean certainly basin [indiscernible] prices have improved and certainly aluminum’s benefit, but can you get a sense of, I guess, the customer base really kicking in here on demand side and is some of the dynamics on them maybe speculative or some of the dynamics with regard to some of the metals flow could be more or less supportive in this recent run, Bill?
William Oplinger: So, a lot of components to that question, Mike, so let me try to parse it out a little bit.
Michael Dudas: Sorry about that. You’re working on the DayQuil there.
William Oplinger: Yeah. But if we start with the Russian sanctions, the first and foremost, we’re appreciative of the action that was taken by US and the UK governments. We’ve been supporting this type of action for and really advocating for this type of action for a couple of years now. Prior to the announcement on Friday, the — and just to be clear, the index price — and this has been our argument for two years. The index price for all metal sales had been set by Russian units which we believe were discounted in the marketplace. And so, you had a global pricing mechanism that had lost its credibility because it was based on a product that wasn’t widely accepted in the market. So, this move reestablishes the credibility of the benchmark price.
To go to the second part of the question, we think it paves the way for the EU to take similar action and we would obviously advocate for similar action. And then, the third part of the question is, I would not attribute all of the price move recently to the Russian sanctions move. We are seeing strong demand across the board. As I said in my prepared remarks, in just about every industry and every region that we serve with the exception of European Building and Construction, but if it’s packaging, automotive, transportation, electrical transmission, we’re seeing growth in each of those markets. And again, if it’s China, Europe or North America, we see it in all markets. So, the price movement that we’ve seen on the LME can be attributed in part to the Russian sanctions and part to some of the strength in demand.
