Factories and Manufacturing

More stories

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    How Nevada Is Pushing to Generate Jobs Beyond the Casinos

    by

    Before the pandemic brought everyday life to a halt, Joe Kiele supported himself through the industry that dominates Nevada’s economy. He waited tables at a steakhouse inside a casino in Reno.Four years later, Mr. Kiele, 49, remains in Reno, yet he now spends his workday inside a factory. In place of worrying about the doneness of a customer’s rib-eye, he trains people on the proper handling of industrial chemicals.His employer, Redwood Materials, is constructing an enormous complex across a lonely stretch of desert. There, the company has begun recycling batteries harvested from discarded smartphones and other electronics. It extracts critical minerals like nickel, lithium, copper and cobalt, and uses them to manufacture components for electric vehicle batteries.Not coincidentally, the plant sits only eight miles from a major customer — a Tesla auto factory.Mr. Kiele’s shift from restaurant server to chemical operator parallels a transformation long championed by Nevada’s leaders seeking to make their economy more diverse, reducing its reliance on the hospitality industry for jobs. In recent years, they have tried to secure investment from companies engaged in the transition toward green energy.The Redwood Materials plant, which occupies roughly 300 acres and is expected to require some $2 billion in investment over the next decade, looms like a monument to Nevada’s aspirations. For the employees, the factory is evidence that there are ways to pay bills besides dealing cards and delivering food.“We’re not based on consumerism,” Mr. Kiele said. “We’re dealing with industry.”This is not the first time that Nevada has sought to broaden its economy. The state has a history of betting its fate on the bounty flowing from a single industry.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    A City Built on Steel Tries to Reverse Its Decline

    by

    Gary, Ind., was once a symbol of American innovation. The home of U.S. Steel’s largest mill, Gary churned out the product that built America’s bridges, tunnels and skyscrapers. The city reaped the rewards, with a prosperous downtown and vibrant neighborhoods.Gary’s smokestacks are still prominent along Lake Michigan’s sandy shore, starkly juxtaposed between the eroding dunes and Chicago’s towering silhouette to the northwest. But now they represent a city looking for a fresh start.More than 10,000 buildings sit abandoned, and the population of 180,000 in the 1960s has dropped by more than half. Poverty, crime and an ignoble moniker — “Scary Gary” — deter private investors and prospective homeowners.As U.S. Steel stands at a crossroads — a planned acquisition would put it under foreign control — so does the city that was named for the company’s founder and helped build its empire. A new mayor and planned revitalization projects have rekindled hope that Gary can forge an economic future beyond steel, the kind of renaissance that many industrial cities in the Midwest have managed.In theory, the potential is there. Gary sits in the country’s third-largest metropolitan area, astride major railroad crossings and next to a shipping port. A national park, Indiana Dunes, is a popular destination for park-loving tourists and curious drivers.“We have the recipe for success,” said Eddie Melton, the newly elected mayor. “We have to change the narrative and make it clear to the world that Gary is open to business.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Airlines Hoping for More Boeing Jets Could Be Waiting Awhile

    by

    The Federal Aviation Administration’s decision to limit Boeing’s production of 737 Max planes could hurt airlines that are struggling to buy enough new aircraft.Boeing hoped 2024 would be the year it would significantly increase production of its popular Max jets. But less than a month into the year, the company is struggling to reassure airline customers that it will still be able to deliver on its promises.That’s because the Federal Aviation Administration said on Wednesday that it would limit the plane maker’s output until it was confident in Boeing’s quality control practices. On Jan. 5, a panel blew off a Boeing 737 Max 9 body shortly after takeoff, terrifying passengers on an Alaska Airlines flight and forcing the pilots to make an emergency landing at Portland International Airport in Oregon. Almost immediately, the F.A.A. grounded some Max 9s.Since then, details have emerged about the jet’s production at Boeing’s facility in Renton, Wash., that have intensified scrutiny of the company’s quality control. Boeing workers opened and then reinstalled the panel about a month before the plane was delivered to Alaska Airlines.The directive is another setback for Boeing, which had been planning to increase production of its Max plane series to more than 500 this year, from about 400 last year. It also planned to add another assembly line at a factory in Everett, Wash., a major Boeing production hub north of Seattle.As part of the F.A.A.’s announcement on Wednesday, it also approved inspection and maintenance procedures for the Max 9. Airlines can return the jets to service once they have followed those instructions. United Airlines said on Thursday that it could resume flying some of those planes as soon as Friday.The move is another potential blow to airlines. Even though demand for flights came roaring back after pandemic lockdowns and travel restrictions eased, the airlines have not been able to take full advantage of that demand. The companies have not been able to buy enough planes or hire enough pilots, flight attendants and other workers they need to operate flights. A surge in the cost of jet fuel after Russia invaded Ukraine also hurt profits.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Where Textile Mills Thrived, Remnants Battle for Survival

    by

    In his 40-year career, William Lucas has seen nearly every step in the erosion of the American garment industry. As general manager of Eagle Sportswear, a company in Middlesex, N.C., that cuts, sews and assembles apparel, he hopes to keep what’s left of that industry intact.Mr. Lucas, 59, has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars training his workers to use more efficient techniques that come with financial bonuses to get employees to work faster.But he fears that his investments may be undermined by a U.S. trade rule.William Lucas has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars training his workers at Eagle Sportswear to use more efficient techniques.The rule, known as de minimis, allows foreign companies to ship goods worth less than $800 directly to U.S. customers while avoiding tariffs. Mr. Lucas and other textile makers in the Carolinas, once a textile hub, contend that the provision — nearly a century old, but exploding in use — motivates retailers to rely even more on foreign producers to keep prices low.Defenders of the rule say it is not to blame for a lack of U.S. competitiveness. But domestic manufacturers say it benefits China in particular at the expense of American manufacturers and workers.Irma Salazar working on an order of shorts at Eagle Sportswear. The company pays bonuses for meeting production goals.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Flush With Investment, New U.S. Factories Face a Familiar Challenge

    by

    Worries are growing in Washington that a flood of Chinese products could put new American investments in clean energy and high-tech factories at risk.The Biden administration has begun pumping more than $2 trillion into U.S. factories and infrastructure, investing huge sums to try to strengthen American industry and fight climate change.But the effort is facing a familiar threat: a surge of low-priced products from China. That is drawing the attention of President Biden and his aides, who are considering new protectionist measures to make sure American industry can compete against Beijing.As U.S. factories spin up to produce electric vehicles, semiconductors and solar panels, China is flooding the market with similar goods, often at significantly lower prices than American competitors. A similar influx is also hitting the European market.American executives and officials argue that China’s actions violate global trade rules. The concerns are spurring new calls in America and Europe for higher tariffs on Chinese imports, potentially escalating what is already a contentious economic relationship between China and the West.The Chinese imports mirror a surge that undercut the Obama administration’s efforts to seed domestic solar manufacturing after the 2008 financial crisis and drove some American start-ups out of business. The administration retaliated with tariffs on solar equipment from China, sparking a dispute at the World Trade Organization.Some Biden officials are concerned that Chinese products could once again threaten the survival of U.S. factories at a moment when the government is spending huge sums to jump-start domestic manufacturing. Administration officials appear likely to raise tariffs on electric vehicles and other strategic goods from China, as part of a review of the levies former President Donald J. Trump imposed on China four years ago, according to people familiar with the matter. That review, which has been underway since Mr. Biden took office, could finally conclude in the next few months.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Democrats Question Semiconductor Program’s Ties to Wall St.

    by

    Two progressive lawmakers warned the Biden administration against creating a revolving door between industry and government as it prepares to hand out $39 billion in grants.Two Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday expressed concerns about ex-Wall Street financiers overseeing the Commerce Department’s distribution of $39 billion in grants to the semiconductor industry, saying the staffing raised questions about the creation and abuse of a revolving door between government and industry.In a letter to the Commerce Department, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington criticized the department’s decision to staff a new office overseeing grants to the chip industry with former employees of Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, KKR and McKinsey & Company.The lawmakers said the staffing decisions risked an outcome where staff members could favor past or future employers and spend taxpayer money “on industry wish-lists, and not in the public interest.”Commerce officials have rejected the characterization, describing the more than 200-person team they have built to review chip industry applications as coming from diverse backgrounds including investing, industry analysis, engineering and project management. In a statement, a Commerce Department representative said the agency had received the letter and would respond through appropriate channels.The criticism highlights the stakes for the Biden administration as it begins distributing billions of dollars to try to rebuild the country’s chip manufacturing capacity.More than 570 companies and organizations have expressed interest in obtaining some of the funding, and it is up to the Commerce Department to determine which of the projects deserve financing. Biden officials have said they will judge applications on their ability to enhance American manufacturing capacity and national security, as well as benefit local communities.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • 100 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Steel Acquisition Proposal Tests Biden’s Industrial Policy

    by

    The president is under pressure from Democrats and Republicans to block the sale to Japan’s Nippon Steel, which could upset a key foreign ally.U.S. Steel is an iconic example of the lost manufacturing muscle that President Biden says his economic policies will bring back to the United States.But last month, the storied-but-diminished company announced plans to be acquired by a Japanese competitor. That development has put Mr. Biden in an awkward bind as he tries to balance attempts to revitalize the nation’s industrial sector with his efforts to rebuild international alliances.Mr. Biden’s administration has expressed some discomfort with the deal and is reviewing the proposed $14.1 billion takeover bid by Japan’s Nippon Steel. The company is offering a hefty premium for U.S. Steel, which has struggled to compete against a flood of cheap foreign metal and has been weighing takeover offers for several months.The proposal has quickly become a high-profile example of the difficult political choices Mr. Biden faces in his zeal to revive American industry, one that could test the degree to which he is willing to flex presidential power in pursuit of what is arguably his primary economic goal: the creation and retention of high-paying union manufacturing jobs in the United States.Mr. Biden is under pressure from the United Steelworkers union and populist senators from both parties, including Democrats defending crucial swing seats in Ohio and Pennsylvania this fall, to nix the sale on national security grounds. The senators contend that domestically owned steel production is critical to U.S. manufacturing and supply chains. They have warned that a foreign owner could be more likely to move U.S. Steel jobs and production overseas.“This really should be a no-brainer,” Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, said in an interview last week. “I don’t know why it would be difficult to say, my gosh, we’ve got to maintain steel production in this country, and particularly a company like this one, where you have thousands of workers in good union jobs.”U.S. Steel executives say the deal would benefit workers and give the merged companies “world-leading capabilities” in steel production. They announced last month that Nippon Steel had agreed to keep the company’s headquarters in Pittsburgh and to honor the four-year collective bargaining agreement that the steelworkers’ union ratified in December 2022.Other supporters of the takeover bid say blocking the sale risks angering a key American ally. Mr. Biden has courted Japanese collaboration on a wide range of issues, including efforts to counter Chinese manufacturing in clean energy and other emerging technologies, and welcomed Japanese investment in new American manufacturing facilities including for advanced batteries.Wilbur Ross, a former steel company executive who served as commerce secretary under President Donald J. Trump, wrote last week in The Wall Street Journal that there is “nothing in the deal from which the U.S. needs defending. Attacks by Washington pols only create unnecessary geopolitical tensions, and those, not the acquisition itself, could endanger American national security.”Adding to the cross-pressures on Mr. Biden: It is unclear what would happen to the 123-year-old U.S. Steel if the administration scuttles the deal and whether doing so would actually guarantee greater job security for the company’s nearly 15,000 North American employees.U.S. Steel executives say the deal with Nippon Steel would benefit workers, but skeptics of the deal are urging President Biden to review it to prevent lost steel production and jobs.Lawrence Bryant/ReutersU.S. Steel has faced challenges for decades because of intensifying foreign competition, particularly from China, which has flooded the global market with cheap, state-subsidized steel. American presidents have spent years trying to bolster and protect domestic steel makers through a mix of subsidies, import restrictions and so-called Buy America requirements for government purchases.“No U.S. industry has benefited more from protection than the steel industry,” Scott Lincicome, a trade policy expert at the libertarian Cato Institute think tank, wrote in a 2017 research paper.In recent years, presidents have increased those protections further. Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on imported steel, including from Japan. Mr. Biden has partially rolled back those levies in an attempt to rebuild alliances. Mr. Biden also included strict Buy America provisions in sweeping new laws to invest in infrastructure, clean energy and other advanced manufacturing.Those efforts have not come close to bringing back the levels of domestic steel production that the United States enjoyed in the 1970s — or even of recent decades. Raw steel production reached higher levels under Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama than it has under Mr. Biden or Mr. Trump.Employment in the industry fell steadily in the 1990s and mid-2000s. In 2022, there were just over 83,000 workers in iron and steel mills in the United States, which was less than half the number from 1992.Senators including Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, both Democrats, and Mr. Hawley and J.D. Vance of Ohio, both Republicans, urged Mr. Biden to review the proposed U.S. Steel sale to guard against lost steel production and jobs. Mr. Brown cited Nippon Steel’s failure to notify or consult with union leaders ahead of making its bid for the company.“Tens of thousands of Americans, including many Ohioans, rely on this industry for good-paying, middle-class jobs,” he wrote in a letter to Mr. Biden last month. “These workers deserve to work for a company that invests in its employees and not only honors their right to join a union, but respects and collaborates with its work force.”The calls for an administrative review of the deal largely focused on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which is known as CFIUS and headed by Janet L. Yellen, the Treasury secretary. The committee scrutinizes possible sales of American firms to foreign ones for possible national security threats, then issues recommendations to the president, who can suspend or block a deal.Shortly before Christmas, Mr. Biden appeared to grant the request for review, while stopping short of saying he would block it.Lael Brainard, who chairs the White House National Economic Council, said in a news release that Mr. Biden welcomed foreign investment in American manufacturing but “believes the purchase of this iconic American-owned company by a foreign entity — even one from a close ally — appears to deserve serious scrutiny in terms of its potential impact on national security and supply chain reliability.”The administration, Ms. Brainard said, “will be ready to look carefully at the findings of any such investigation and to act if appropriate.”Steelworkers cheered the move. David McCall, president of United Steelworkers International, said in a statement that Mr. Biden was “demonstrating once again the president’s unwavering commitment to domestic workers and industries.”Independent experts say it would be well within historical norms for the committee to evaluate the sale. That will likely include a detailed economic analysis of whether the deal could lead to diminished steel production capacity in the United States, said Emily Kilcrease, a CFIUS expert and senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.But Ms. Kilcrease said that based on the committee’s past decisions, she expected the review to stop well short of a recommendation to kill the sale. Instead, she said, CFIUS might require an agreement from Nippon Steel to maintain certain levels of U.S. employment or production as a condition of the sale’s going through.“I would be shocked if this deal got blocked,” she said.Mr. Hawley said the choice was ultimately Mr. Biden’s — and a test of his commitment to the industry.“If the administration wants to block the sale, they absolutely have grounds to do it and the legal authority,” he said. “So it’s just a question of, do they want to? And will they have the guts to do it?” More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Awards Chip Supplier $162 Million to Bolster Critical Industries

    by

    The Biden administration said its second grant under a new program would help Microchip Technology expand its facilities in Oregon and Colorado.The Biden administration on Thursday announced plans to provide $162 million in federal grants to Microchip Technology, an Arizona-based semiconductor company that supplies the automotive, defense and other industries.The agreement is the second award announced under a new program intended to help ensure that American companies that rely on semiconductors have a stable supply. Last month, the Biden administration announced a $35 million grant for BAE Systems, a defense contractor.The investment will enable Microchip to increase its production of semiconductors that are used in cars, airplanes, appliances, medical devices and military products. The administration said it expected the award to create more than 700 jobs in construction and manufacturing.“Today’s announcement with Microchip is a meaningful step in our efforts to bolster the supply chain for legacy semiconductors that are in everything from cars to washing machines to missiles,” Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo said in a statement.Microchip plans to use $90 million to modernize and expand a facility in Colorado Springs and $72 million to expand a facility in Gresham, Ore. The administration said the funding would help Microchip triple its output at the two sites and decrease the company’s reliance on foreign facilities to help make its products.The company’s chips aren’t cutting-edge but are key components of nearly every military and space program. Microchip is one of the largest suppliers of semiconductors to the defense industrial base and a designated trusted foundry for the military. It also plays a crucial role in industries that are important for the national economy, U.S. officials said.That role became more obvious during the pandemic, when a global chip shortage cast a spotlight on domestic suppliers like Microchip. With foreign chip factories shut down to help contain the virus, automakers and other companies scrambled to secure supplies. As a result, demand for Microchip’s products surged.Those shortages also helped motivate lawmakers to pull together a funding bill aimed at shoring up American manufacturing and reduce reliance on foreign chips. The 2022 CHIPS and Science Act gave the Commerce Department $53 billion to invest in the semiconductor industry, including $39 billion for federal grants to encourage chip companies to set up U.S. facilities.The Commerce Department is expected to begin announcing larger awards in the coming months for major chip fabrication facilities owned by companies like Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, known as TSMC.Microchip previously announced plans to increase its capacity in both Oregon and Colorado, but the government funding would be used to expand those enhancements and bring more production back to the United States, officials said. According to its filings, Microchip relies on outside facilities to make a significant proportion of its products — roughly 63 percent of its net sales in 2023 — a relatively common practice in the industry.While attention has focused on ensuring that U.S. facilities can manufacture some of the world’s most advanced chips, there are growing concerns about Chinese investments in less advanced semiconductors, also known as legacy chips, which help power cars, computers, missiles and dishwashers.U.S. officials are questioning whether such investments could increase the United States’ reliance on China or allow Chinese firms to undercut competitors. The Commerce Department has said it plans to begin a survey this month to identify how U.S. companies are getting their legacy chips and reduce security risks linked to China.The deal announced Thursday is a nonbinding preliminary agreement. The Commerce Department will carry out due diligence on the project before reaching the award’s final terms.The department said it had received more than 570 statements of interest and more than 170 pre-applications, full applications and concept plans from companies and organizations interested in the funding.Don Clark More